Equestria World: Applejack's Infrastructure Adventures

[Thanqol]

Playtest document (https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BzyF4KHlN7ETbEpSM1VRbGJFbFk/view?ths=true)


It is time. It is happening. I am starting on my path to create my very own Apocalypse World (http://apocalypse-world.com/) hack based on my favourite pastel horses. It's going to be the game that I've always wanted to play but no one else will run.

So let's start with the basics. First, the agenda. Then, the moves. Then, the principles. Then maybe the playbooks. Why the moves second? Because the basic moves define the entire shape of the game through their presence or absence.


AGENDA:
- Focus on the little things
- Plant seeds and watch them grow
- Play to find out what happens


And here's the very first move:

Ask Your Friends For Help

When you ask your friends for help, roll +Honesty

On a 10+ you clearly explain your problem to them and accept their help if they offer it.
On a 7-9 choose one:
- You can bring yourself to explain the problem out loud
- You can accept their help when they offer it


There it is, that's the move that underpins so many episodes of Friendship is Magic and creates such simple, sweet, interpersonal drama. It's the move that turns small things into big things. It's the foundation of this entire system and everything's going to build from there. I'm really proud of it.

Discussion is welcome, I'm literally making this up as I go.

[SiuiS]

and subscribed.


Rolling +Honesty lets you explain a problem and ask for help. Requiring a roll implies this shape of not being able to be open without the roll.
Can you explain problems without rolling +Honesty?
If you start to explain your problems, is that retroactively +Honesty roll?




Questions aside that's beautiful. That really is the heart of things.

[Thanqol]

and subscribed.


Rolling +Honesty lets you explain a problem and ask for help. Requiring a roll implies this shape of not being able to be open without the roll.
Can you explain problems without rolling +Honesty?
If you start to explain your problems, is that retroactively +Honesty roll?

You can explain problems but you can't explain your problems, the things you personally need help with. If you start to explain your problems and then fail the roll it could turn into 'And that's what Applejack would have said if pride hadn't gotten the better of her in that moment'.

The execution is a little tricky. It's not as elegant as some AW moves where you make the threat, and then roll the dice for Go Aggro. It's something that players have to consider a little bit more/buy into before they make the action or the MC has to be on point about asking. I wonder if I can refine that somehow.

E: Though I suppose it's not that different from Monster Heart's Share Your Pain.


Questions aside that's beautiful. That really is the heart of things.

Thank you!

[SiuiS]

Would it be good to ponder which attributes there are (and how they build into moves) or which other moves there are (and what common traits they break down to)? I think you've got a choice between going full Elements of Harmony, or picking appropriate overlapping traits, and there are merits to both.

That's all I have for a while. Now I play the waiting game.

[Balmas]

It is time. It is happening. I am starting on my path to create my very own Apocalypse World (http://apocalypse-world.com/) hack based on my favourite pastel horses. It's going to be the game that I've always wanted to play but no one else will run.

So let's start with the basics. First, the agenda. Then, the moves. Then, the principles. Then maybe the playbooks. Why the moves second? Because the basic moves define the entire shape of the game through their presence or absence.


AGENDA:
- Focus on the little things
- Plant seeds and watch them grow
- Play to find out what happens


And here's the very first move:

Ask Your Friends For Help

When you ask your friends for help, roll +Honesty

On a 10+ you clearly explain your problem to them.
On a 7-9 choose one:
- You can bring yourself to explain the problem out loud
- You can accept their help when they offer it


There it is, that's the move that underpins so many episodes of Friendship is Magic and creates such simple, sweet, interpersonal drama. It's the move that turns small things into big things. It's the foundation of this entire system and everything's going to build from there. I'm really proud of it.

Discussion is welcome, I'm literally making this up as I go.

Hmm. Interesting concept, though I'm not sure that it matches Apocalypse World's game design.

As I understand it, Apocalypse World is designed so that all active power is in the hands of the PCs. By that, I mean that the motive force is all in the PC's camp. NPCs do not Go Aggro or Seduce and Manipulate. They might attack, or try to bargain for more, but all the power lies with the person making the move.

The Master of Ceremonies, on the other hand, is mostly reactive. There might be outside forces moving in the background, but the MoC usually moves on a failed roll by the PCs to Activate Weaknesses in Your Stuff, or Predict Future Badness, etc. Apocalypse World is all about the PCs, what they choose to do, how they do it, and what the world does in response.

As such, I feel that a move where you are literally rolling to figure out whether you can even open your mouth is contrary to the AW philosophy. It doesn't empower the PCs. It takes away an ability--to open your mouth, to decide to accept someone's help--and then masquerades as generously giving something that PCs should be able to do by default.


Further thoughts:
-Very rarely in AW is the result of a move that you get what you want, no strings attached. Partial success usually involves "Yes, but..." consequences. Even full successes don't get you 100% what you want. Seize by Force successfully means that you can decimate somebody and take little damage, but there's still a chance you'll get hurt. Reading a Sitch, in addition to turning what might have otherwise been an innocuous scene into a charged situation, has a limited list of questions that can be answered.
-Moves are designed to move a scene along. This seems more like it's designed to end a scene. It's the resolution of the episode, the moment where the central character realizes that what he or she is doing is causing problems. Usually, there's maybe two minutes left in the episode, where all that's left is to tie up the loose ends and write a Dear Princess Celestia.
-How does this even work? On a 10+, I can explain clearly what the problem is, but it's not stated that I can accept their help. Does that require a second roll? Why?

[SiuiS]

Those are good thoughts, but remember that this is a hack. Thanqol's statement of but-in is a resonant one. This is, in it's own way, a game of hubris. I could see just this one mechanic rolling around through Green is Not Your Color, [rarity wings episode], Applebuck Season, Sweet and Elite and a few others. The players then would make all the drama.

I suspect this is built as much on Monster Hearts as apocalypse world. You should check out monster hearts, Balmas!

[Madcrafter]

Oh well ninja'd by Siuis there, but that was going to be my point to Balmas. Just because AW doesn't do it that way doesn't mean a game Powered By the Apocalypse can't. It gives a more optimistic tone too, if there are more moves that succeed completely on 10+.

[Thanqol]

Hmm. Interesting concept, though I'm not sure that it matches Apocalypse World's game design.

As I understand it, Apocalypse World is designed so that all active power is in the hands of the PCs. By that, I mean that the motive force is all in the PC's camp. NPCs do not Go Aggro or Seduce and Manipulate. They might attack, or try to bargain for more, but all the power lies with the person making the move.

The Master of Ceremonies, on the other hand, is mostly reactive. There might be outside forces moving in the background, but the MoC usually moves on a failed roll by the PCs to Activate Weaknesses in Your Stuff, or Predict Future Badness, etc. Apocalypse World is all about the PCs, what they choose to do, how they do it, and what the world does in response.

As such, I feel that a move where you are literally rolling to figure out whether you can even open your mouth is contrary to the AW philosophy. It doesn't empower the PCs. It takes away an ability--to open your mouth, to decide to accept someone's help--and then masquerades as generously giving something that PCs should be able to do by default.

Yes but, I'm probably drawing more on Monster Hearts than AW in this situation. Monster Hearts is the AW system for petty teenage drama and it has moves like 'Hold Steady', where the consequence of success is 'you don't freak out'. Monster Hearts benefits hugely from this move because the move implies that from time to time teenagers will freak out because they're messy, uncontrolled sacks of emotions. It's odd in that it's a move primarily triggered by the MC, but it doesn't undermine the system or anything.

For AJA to work players need to be incentivised to create friendship drama. They can either be inspired to do it through something they can't do - like this move - or something they can do - like future moves. Monster Hearts also defines it's limits by staking out something teenagers can't do: Teenagers can't choose who they're sexually attracted to. It's a denial of what seems like a fundamental part of the player's decisions about their character but it's also the most profound statement the system makes.


Further thoughts:
-Very rarely in AW is the result of a move that you get what you want, no strings attached. Partial success usually involves "Yes, but..." consequences. Even full successes don't get you 100% what you want. Seize by Force successfully means that you can decimate somebody and take little damage, but there's still a chance you'll get hurt. Reading a Sitch, in addition to turning what might have otherwise been an innocuous scene into a charged situation, has a limited list of questions that can be answered.

It's the same principle here. Ask Your Friends turns what should be an innocuous, 'hey Twilight, help me buck these apples?' into a charged situation where, even if AJ can come out and say it, represents a significant investment for the character. We respect her more for overcoming her mental blocks and stubbornness.

The not get 100% of what you want thing is a good point but I'm also not sure if it's in genre for always partial failures.


-Moves are designed to move a scene along. This seems more like it's designed to end a scene. It's the resolution of the episode, the moment where the central character realizes that what he or she is doing is causing problems. Usually, there's maybe two minutes left in the episode, where all that's left is to tie up the loose ends and write a Dear Princess Celestia.

This isn't designed for episodic format. It's, like, sometimes Applejack aces her Honesty roll, asks her friends for help, and beats the Flim Flam brothers. Other times she doesn't and winds up in Dodge Junction. It's all like one long arc of Applejack.

Also, just because you ask your friends for help doesn't say anything about what they do about that!


-How does this even work? On a 10+, I can explain clearly what the problem is, but it's not stated that I can accept their help. Does that require a second roll? Why?

10+ is you can act freely here. Needs clarification.

[Madcrafter]

The move given could maybe use some work. While I like the concept, I think that it currently requires a bit more, hmmm, either metagaming from players than it should, or shuts the plotline down.
10+: problem explained, and your friends and you can go and solve it together. Sunshine and Rainbows.
7-9:1: ask for help successful, but implication being that you can't accept any help (from the other option). This seems like a false choice. You've asked your friends but won't accept help if it is offered. Why all of a sudden change your mind? What happens if they just help you anyways without your acceptance? Do you have to actively avoid it then? As it reads, it just sounds like instead of 6 ponies trying to buck all the apples, you just have 1+5 ponies bucking all the apples (since we're going with AJ here and friends decide to help)
7-9:2: problem not explained, but you can accept help. Which is useless, since no pony knows you have a problem (unless they did, in which case you have to hope they can connect your sudden failure in communication or act on their own initiative (which means you never had to do the move in the first place)). As written, it cancels the trigger, which is hella weird.
Miss: ? No GM moves/principles yet.

I really think I did a complete failure about explaining what I meant there with the move, but I'll post it anyways.

[Thanqol]

The move given could maybe use some work. While I like the concept, I think that it currently requires a bit more, hmmm, either metagaming from players than it should, or shuts the plotline down.
10+: problem explained, and your friends and you can go and solve it together. Sunshine and Rainbows.
7-9:1: ask for help successful, but implication being that you can't accept any help (from the other option). This seems like a false choice. You've asked your friends but won't accept help if it is offered. Why all of a sudden change your mind? What happens if they just help you anyways without your acceptance?

Applebuck season. I.e. "I need to buck all these apples but I don't need no help doing it!" You're clear about what the problem is but you're also clear that it's your problem alone.


7-9:2: problem not explained, but you can accept help. Which is useless, since no pony knows you have a problem (unless they did, in which case you have to hope they can connect your sudden failure in communication or act on their own initiative (which means you never had to do the move in the first place)). As written, it cancels the trigger, which is hella weird.

This is that you can't bring yourself to ask for help but you can accept help if offered. You don't have the courage to articulate the problem, i.e. Fluttershy in Green Isn't Your Colour.

EDIT: The move asks, "What stops you from getting your friend's help? Your pride or your cowardice?"

[Madcrafter]

Applebuck season. I.e. "I need to buck all these apples but I don't need no help doing it!" You're clear about what the problem is but you're also clear that it's your problem alone.The problem here is that that statement does not trigger the move. Applejack is not Asking her friends for help, she's just making a statement. Even if it is technically a problem (even if she doesn't realize it).


This is that you can't bring yourself to ask for help but you can accept help if offered. You don't have the courage to articulate the problem, i.e. Fluttershy in Green Isn't Your Colour.

EDIT: The move asks, "What stops you from getting your friend's help? Your pride or your cowardice?"Yeah, I think it's the trigger that's the issue here. As a preliminary fix, you could try changing it to When you try to ask your friends for help..., though that still doesn't solve the problem above.

Maybe When you reveal a personal problem to your friends...? Still might need a better definition of a problem.

[Balmas]

Yes but, I'm probably drawing more on Monster Hearts than AW in this situation. Monster Hearts is the AW system for petty teenage drama and it has moves like 'Hold Steady', where the consequence of success is 'you don't freak out'. Monster Hearts benefits hugely from this move because the move implies that from time to time teenagers will freak out because they're messy, uncontrolled sacks of emotions. It's odd in that it's a move primarily triggered by the MC, but it doesn't undermine the system or anything.

I don't have full access to Monster Hearts, so I can't fully comment, but from what I have, Monster Hearts isn't just Teen Drama. It's Buffy the Vampire Slayer with dice. As such, Hold Steady isn't about blowing up at your friends so much as it is about resisting the urge to eat somebody's face. Gives the move a different feel, I think.


Would this move happen every time someone has to ask for help?

[Thanqol]

Core Mechanic: Responsibilities

A big theme of FiM is taking on responsibilities. Many episodes have this current running through them and so I'm thinking your list of Responsibilities is going to be the core social mechanic in AIA in the same way that Conditions dominate Monster Hearts. Responsibilities might be things like, 'Coach a small team of fillies', 'keep the weather under control', or 'organise a town festival'. Some sort of mechanic needs to be attached to Responsibilities to make sure people take them on. Responsibilities should be something that you want to have but can't always handle.

I'm thinking that the solution to the 'definition of problem' issue with Ask Your Friends might be to add a mechanical definition to 'Problem'. So the Responsibility is 'harvest apples' the Problem is 'Down a worker'.

I'm not sure about it but I feel like that does summarise the small town feel I'm going for here. I'll think about it some more.

[Madcrafter]

Core Mechanic: Responsibilities

A big theme of FiM is taking on responsibilities. Many episodes have this current running through them and so I'm thinking your list of Responsibilities is going to be the core social mechanic in AIA in the same way that Conditions dominate Monster Hearts. Responsibilities might be things like, 'Coach a small team of fillies', 'keep the weather under control', or 'organise a town festival'. Some sort of mechanic needs to be attached to Responsibilities to make sure people take them on. Responsibilities should be something that you want to have but can't always handle.
These sound like Bonds with the setting instead of another character. You could have the same resolution (when players agree they are done, maybe at end of session, award XP). For ability to handle, that doesn't seem like something anyone would be able to know ahead of time. Seems like a good place for the GM to intervene with complications, but that isn't really in their agenda.

[SiuiS]

The problem here is that that statement does not trigger the move. Applejack is not Asking her friends for help, she's just making a statement. Even if it is technically a problem (even if she doesn't realize it).

How so? Ruling point of AW is that if something happens that should have been a move, it is a move. If the natural fiction brings you to and through a situation handled by a move, the game says that's a move.


I don't have full access to Monster Hearts, so I can't fully comment, but from what I have, Monster Hearts isn't just Teen Drama. It's Buffy the Vampire Slayer with dice. As such, Hold Steady isn't about blowing up at your friends so much as it is about resisting the urge to eat somebody's face. Gives the move a different feel, I think.


Would this move happen every time someone has to ask for help?

I don't know. I didn't get that impression at all, although the camp level certainly can drive it that direction.


Core Mechanic: Responsibilities

A big theme of FiM is taking on responsibilities. Many episodes have this current running through them and so I'm thinking your list of Responsibilities is going to be the core social mechanic in AIA in the same way that Conditions dominate Monster Hearts. Responsibilities might be things like, 'Coach a small team of fillies', 'keep the weather under control', or 'organise a town festival'. Some sort of mechanic needs to be attached to Responsibilities to make sure people take them on. Responsibilities should be something that you want to have but can't always handle.

I hate to say this, but maybe Reaponsibilities should be as defined as tags are in A*W? They mean and so what the group consensus is that they mean or do.


I'm thinking that the solution to the 'definition of problem' issue with Ask Your Friends might be to add a mechanical definition to 'Problem'. So the Responsibility is 'harvest apples' the Problem is 'Down a worker'.

I'm not sure about it but I feel like that does summarise the small town feel I'm going for here. I'll think about it some more.

Interesting. No comments yet.

[Thanqol]

I hate to say this, but maybe Reaponsibilities should be as defined as tags are in A*W? They mean and so what the group consensus is that they mean or do.

Yeah, like, Rainbow Dash's mentor relationship with Scootaloo is a responsibility. There'd be suggestions and guidelines but they'd also be pretty malleable in terms of what they are, just like Conditions.

On the other hand, they should have similar mechanical impact and interaction with Moves. "When you fail a responsibility..." "When you need help with a responsibility..." "When someone has conflicting responsibilities..." etc


These sound like Bonds with the setting instead of another character. You could have the same resolution (when players agree they are done, maybe at end of session, award XP). For ability to handle, that doesn't seem like something anyone would be able to know ahead of time. Seems like a good place for the GM to intervene with complications, but that isn't really in their agenda.

Yeah that's an interesting point.

GMs intervening with complications will be a Principle, but not an Agenda.

[Thanqol]

Help Decide

When you help someone decide between two conflicting responsibilities, roll +Loyalty (NB: Stat names still under heavy consideration, for now I'm thinking elements of harmony)

10+: Both.
7-9: Pick one:
- They mark XP if they take your advice
- They take [some sort of penalty/freeze up/generate a new Problem] if they don't.


Another common theme of FiM episodes is someone, usually Rainbow Dash but everyone's been there, deciding between temptation and friendship. Usually these arcs resolve in someone finding out about it and giving some snarky advice. I think this move will gain more definition once Responsibilities get fleshed out and once I come up with a reason to encourage ponies to try and juggle multiple, conflicting responsibilities. The +problems thing is really cool I think because it lets a friend predict doom if their advice is ignored, much like a Perspective in Kingdom.

[Thanqol]

Oh, obviously:

When you do something nice (gift/party/etc) for someone else, roll +Generous:

10+: Both
7-9: Pick one:
- You appreciate it
- They appreciate it

[TheAmishPirate]

I'm going to read through this in the morning, and probably will waste many an hour coming up with mechanics and ideas.

You monster. :smallamused:

[Xefas]

(NB: Stat names still under heavy consideration, for now I'm thinking elements of harmony)

Maybe Elements of Harmony with the addition of "Friendship" to replace hax*?

Nevermind me. I'm just stoked to find out there are non-zero people on this board that play Apocalypse World. Will follow this with interest.

*Obviously I mean 'History', but we always call it hax because of the 'Hx' abbreviation on the Apocalypse World sheets.

[Thanqol]

Maybe Elements of Harmony with the addition of "Friendship" to replace hax*?

Nevermind me. I'm just stoked to find out there are non-zero people on this board that play Apocalypse World. Will follow this with interest.

*Obviously I mean 'History', but we always call it hax because of the 'Hx' abbreviation on the Apocalypse World sheets.

Oh that might be a good idea. Six core stats is too many so I was planning on leaving Friendship out.

I don't know about using Hx as my base, though, perhaps I might steal Strings instead. Don't know about that, though, strings are emotional leverage. And the one of the Agendas is about growth which Hx better models. Hmmm~

[TheAmishPirate]

Oh that might be a good idea. Six core stats is too many so I was planning on leaving Friendship out.

I don't know about using Hx as my base, though, perhaps I might steal Strings instead. Don't know about that, though, strings are emotional leverage. And the one of the Agendas is about growth which Hx better models. Hmmm~

Plus, Hx affects how well you help/hinder somebody. Most of the moves thus far are some variation on helping a friend out. Hx on top of that would seem redundant, and a little too generalized.

[Xefas]

It's been a while since I watched some ponies, but I figured I'd take a shot at helping. IIRC, Twilight's magic doesn't always work as intended. I'm thinking about stuff like Twilight's spell that turned the parasprites into (more) ravenous clouds of destruction.

Cast A Spell

Whenever you want to cast a big spell - not just some minor feat of telekinesis, but something that effects a whole town or more - roll +Magic.

On a 10+ choose two.
On a 7-9 choose one.

- The spell can be cast without significant preparation. If you have everything you need, you can set it off whenever.
- The spell only requires things you have lying around. You don't need to ask anypony for help or go on an adventure to find a mysterious reagent.
- The spell is a one-pony job. You won't need some friends to help with your ritual chants or to act as energy conduits or anything.

Then, when you successfully cast the spell, roll +Magic again.

On a 10+ choose two.
On a 7-9 choose one.

- The spell had the effect you wanted it to.
- Only one of your friends will suffer some unintended fallout from it.
- A large number of innocent bystanders have not been put in danger because of your hubris.

[Thanqol]

It's been a while since I watched some ponies, but I figured I'd take a shot at helping. IIRC, Twilight's magic doesn't always work as intended. I'm thinking about stuff like Twilight's spell that turned the parasprites into (more) ravenous clouds of destruction.

Cast A Spell

Whenever you want to cast a big spell - not just some minor feat of telekinesis, but something that effects a whole town or more - roll +Magic.

On a 10+ choose two.
On a 7-9 choose one.

- The spell can be cast without significant preparation. If you have everything you need, you can set it off whenever.
- The spell only requires things you have lying around. You don't need to ask anypony for help or go on an adventure to find a mysterious reagent.
- The spell is a one-pony job. You won't need some friends to help with your ritual chants or to act as energy conduits or anything.

Then, when you successfully cast the spell, roll +Magic again.

On a 10+ choose two.
On a 7-9 choose one.

- The spell had the effect you wanted it to.
- Only one of your friends will suffer some unintended fallout from it.
- A large number of innocent bystanders have not been put in danger because of your hubris.

No, this isn't what the system wants to look at. When you cast a spell to help out your friends you roll +Generous to Do Something Nice. What we've got here is an effects based Move which is trying to simulate a magic system, it makes one of the base stats 'are you a unicorn', and moreover it's too big. Affecting the entire town is explicitly not the scope of this game. It's not Twilight's Sorcery Simulator, it's Applejack's Infrastructure Adventures.

Casting big scale spells might be a class move under the Princess playbook but they are not basic moves.

[Xefas]

Casting big scale spells might be a class move under the Aristocrat playbook but they are not basic moves.

Ahhh. I see. Cool.

[Madcrafter]

How so? Ruling point of AW is that if something happens that should have been a move, it is a move. If the natural fiction brings you to and through a situation handled by a move, the game says that's a move.Mmm, but I read that differently, also because I was thinking about before Applejack starts trying to buck all the apples. Once she is tired, then I agree that is likely a problem and should trigger, but she still isn't "asking for help". It puts the action that triggers the move as part of the effect of the move which is weird, and why I suggested "reveal a problem" instead, though it isn't a perfect fix.


Help Decide

When you help someone decide between two conflicting responsibilities, roll +Loyalty (NB: Stat names still under heavy consideration, for now I'm thinking elements of harmony)

10+: Both.
7-9: Pick one:
- They mark XP if they take your advice
- They take [some sort of penalty/freeze up/generate a new Problem] if they don't.


Another common theme of FiM episodes is someone, usually Rainbow Dash but everyone's been there, deciding between temptation and friendship. Usually these arcs resolve in someone finding out about it and giving some snarky advice. I think this move will gain more definition once Responsibilities get fleshed out and once I come up with a reason to encourage ponies to try and juggle multiple, conflicting responsibilities. The +problems thing is really cool I think because it lets a friend predict doom if their advice is ignored, much like a Perspective in Kingdom.This one reads strange with Both and Pick One. I'd write it out in full sentence perhaps.
Probably have something to say about the weal/woe duality, but can't really brain it right now. For this style of move maybe take a look at the DW Wizard's Know-It-All move? It's similar, but generally a little more positive. Have to see how problems turn out before seeing if adding one with a basic move really works.

[Thanqol]

Mmm, but I read that differently, also because I was thinking about before Applejack starts trying to buck all the apples. Once she is tired, then I agree that is likely a problem and should trigger, but she still isn't "asking for help". It puts the action that triggers the move as part of the effect of the move which is weird, and why I suggested "reveal a problem" instead, though it isn't a perfect fix.

I'm becoming increasingly convinced by having Problems be a mechanical thing like Conditions, so that way you know straight up what you can't talk about without rolling.


This one reads strange with Both and Pick One. I'd write it out in full sentence perhaps.

All of these are in alpha draft mode. A lot of it's open to adjustment/specifics as the system develops, right now it's just the skeletons.


Probably have something to say about the weal/woe duality, but can't really brain it right now. For this style of move maybe take a look at the DW Wizard's Know-It-All move? It's similar, but generally a little more positive. Have to see how problems turn out before seeing if adding one with a basic move really works.

Wilco. It's using the same architecture as seduce/manipulate from AW but it's all hyper sketchy right now.

[Madcrafter]

I'm becoming increasingly convinced by having Problems be a mechanical thing like Conditions, so that way you know straight up what you can't talk about without rolling.
All of these are in alpha draft mode. A lot of it's open to adjustment/specifics as the system develops, right now it's just the skeletons.
Wilco. It's using the same architecture as seduce/manipulate from AW but it's all hyper sketchy right now.Yeah should maybe hash those out first then. I am by no means trying to delve straight into editing paralysis, just getting stuff down so I don't forget/miss it.

[SiuiS]

Explain the word "infrastructure" in the game's title.


Not to me. I think I get it. But calibrate the expectations of folks coming in, s'il vous plaît.

[Thanqol]

Explain the word "infrastructure" in the game's title.


Not to me. I think I get it. But calibrate the expectations of folks coming in, s'il vous plaît.

The focus is rapidly turning away from an original intention to focus on architecture due to the organic generation of the moves, but the basic idea is that digging an irrigation ditch should be a major project and source of contentment. It's about making your own surroundings better; it's about simplicity and small town life.

I'm thinking things like 'Shopkeeper', or 'Performer', or 'Shelter' and such for Playbook names. Things that imply your daily job. Since the Agenda is to sweat the small stuff it'll be stuff like running your business, figuring out what to spend your meagre savings on and so forth.

[Madcrafter]

...figuring out what to spend your meagre savings on...Glory to Arstotzka!
Sorry, first thing that popped into my mind.

Though now that I think about it, maybe the Clerk/Administrator? Hmm.

[Thanqol]

Revelation:

Responsibility: A thing that needs to be done, fixed, secured or accomplished.
Responsibilities have a Catastrophe timer. If a responsibility is neglected for too long it executes it's Catastrophe and resolves itself. If the Dam isn't fixed in time, it breaks and floods. If the birthday party isn't thrown the child grows up sad.
Problems: A defensive measure thrown up by a Responsibility to stop people from resolving it. A cement shortage, harvest blight, leaky pipe. As problems mount up they also serve as warnings of the coming Catastrophe.

Responsibilities come in two levels. Town and personal.

Personal responsibilities are things that affect your own home, hearth and livelihood. Town responsibilities are things like Winter Wrap Up.

Responsibilities will generate regardless of people dealing with them. People will want to resolve as many responsibilities as possible because if they don't things go bad in meaningful ways. However if you take on a responsibility and fail it, you get Blamed for it. Taking on town responsibilities instead of personal ones will give you some sort of reward from that community. Dunno if it's systematised.

There will be special rules and things. For instance, the Princess playbook has a move that will read 'If ever a town responsibility is failed, you are blamed in addition to whoever screwed up'. There also might be things like, 'When a responsibility to do with social events comes up, you have the first shot at it' for the Performer.

The idea is to have responsibilities become burdensome and contradictory, so it becomes a complex of priorities - which other players can then f*ck with using their moves.

[SiuiS]

Post 1: I see. So you want a noncombat RTS. That's neat. Note it's also shorthand for an idea, not a technical label.

Post 2: so responsibilities are both conditions and fronts?


I'm being stupid.


Thanqol, I am going to give you the playbooks for the #Whitebooks game. It's not as polished, but the basic idea is that there is no master of ceremonies. Each playbook has a few MC moves that are triggered by actions that naturally arise in the story, based on who is in the Protagonist role at the time.
An example is that whoever has the Exploration book starts off and describes the basic area, after discussion charts the basic adventure. The first time combat happens, the Combat playbook gets an interrupt, becomes temporary MC, and uses the moves in their book to flesh stuff out. If instead someone decides to Lead or Explore on their Own, a different playbook gets the lead. Etc.

This way you bypass the whole issue of 'how do I set up fronts in this sort of game' and make it every player's responsibility I saddle every other player with Responsibilities and tick down the calamity timer.

[Thanqol]

Additional concept: Harm represents your savings. Ponies aren't in threat of physical danger but they're in danger of bankruptcy. Money is literally your health bar.

Moves for Kindness and Laughter are eluding me. Laughter might be something to do with handling stressful situations/multitasking. Kindness I dunno because it almost seems like getting something out of kindness makes it cynical? Kindness might be able to overcome pride and stuff maybe but that feels kind of feedback loopy.

EDIT: A sub option could just be to dump the elements of harmony stat array. It'd be neat to have but not at the expense of what needs to be done.


Post 1: I see. So you want a noncombat RTS. That's neat. Note it's also shorthand for an idea, not a technical label.

Pretty much yeah.


Post 2: so responsibilities are both conditions and fronts?

Thinking so.


Thanqol, I am going to give you the playbooks for the #Whitebooks game. It's not as polished, but the basic idea is that there is no master of ceremonies. Each playbook has a few MC moves that are triggered by actions that naturally arise in the story, based on who is in the Protagonist role at the time.
An example is that whoever has the Exploration book starts off and describes the basic area, after discussion charts the basic adventure. The first time combat happens, the Combat playbook gets an interrupt, becomes temporary MC, and uses the moves in their book to flesh stuff out. If instead someone decides to Lead or Explore on their Own, a different playbook gets the lead. Etc.

This way you bypass the whole issue of 'how do I set up fronts in this sort of game' and make it every player's responsibility I saddle every other player with Responsibilities and tick down the calamity timer.

Oh, that's an idea. That's a really interesting idea. Each playbook having two sides, one when you're MC'ing and one when you're playing. Absolutely worth thinking about.

[SiuiS]

Here we are. (https://docs.google.com/folderview?id=0B0X-7rQ2kSDrRWotNHNWWlpwV1k&usp=docslist_api)

Was in open beta a while back, still have rights to use for play and modification. Not sure how to Drive though, so let me know if that actually works.

It is by default a dungeon crawl game but the concepts are sound. The dungeon could be a city or a story, with each room being a district or act, so as always it's about inspiration, not grit.

E: harm as bits works with attributes. Laughter eases stress, let's you refocus on stuff. +1 forward for other ponies, take a hit to your bits? Kindness has no money cost, but likely adds "beig nice/ helping out" to your responsibilities, still gives +1 forward. Or hold 1 or something. Lots of stuff AW has I've not yet tinkered with.

[Thanqol]

ARGH I'm an idiot, Kindness is so obvious.

When you emphasise with someone else roll +kind. On a 10+ mark 3, on a 7-9 mark 2. Over the course of the conversation you can spend those points to ask:
- How could I assure you that _?
- What is the crux of your resistance or reluctance?
- Who might win you over if I cannot?
- What is your character really feeling?
- Ask a question of your own. If the other player chooses to answer it, it stands, otherwise retract it and ask one of the above instead.

[SiuiS]

So kindness is the answer to "how do we solve only being able to tell people about a problem or get help with a problem?" Then?

Makes sense. You can burden others with yourself or ask about their burdens and Synergize them.

Categorize attributes by pairs or trios? These attributes discover things, these attributes support others and these attributes solve problems.

Loyalty and Magic are supportive and are give ponies tools to achieve things with. Honesty and Kindness are investigative. Generosity and laughter support others so they can solve their own problems.
Consider switching loyalty and generosity, at risk of "unicorns solve problems".

[Thanqol]

When you act under pressure roll +laughter. On a 10+, chose 3, on 7-9 choose 2.

- You inspire _ to follow you
- You can manage one additional task at the same time
- You keep your cool
- You startle or scatter _

And I think that's the first five basic moves; the interpersonal ones. I'm thinking of 3-4 more to deal with more task-based things. I think that's a good foundation though.

[Thanqol]

Responsibility Move:

When you willingly accept a responsibility, hold 3. When you are tricked or forced into accepting, hold 1.

You can spend your hold at any time to:

- Placate someone who thinks you are failing/abandoning your responsibility
- Renounce your responsibility
- Convince someone to give you some aid towards the task

[TheAmishPirate]

The focus is rapidly turning away from an original intention to focus on architecture due to the organic generation of the moves, but the basic idea is that digging an irrigation ditch should be a major project and source of contentment. It's about making your own surroundings better; it's about simplicity and small town life.

I'm thinking things like 'Shopkeeper', or 'Performer', or 'Shelter' and such for Playbook names. Things that imply your daily job. Since the Agenda is to sweat the small stuff it'll be stuff like running your business, figuring out what to spend your meagre savings on and so forth.

Where does Friendship fit into this game? Not in the mechanical sense, but what's the sort of design you're going for there? What captures the feel you want to get out of whatever interpersonal connection stat thingy that'll eventually make its way into this game?


When you act under pressure roll +laughter. On a 10+, chose 3, on 7-9 choose 2.

- You inspire _ to follow you
- You can manage one additional task at the same time
- You keep your cool
- You startle or scatter _

And I think that's the first five basic moves; the interpersonal ones. I'm thinking of 3-4 more to deal with more task-based things. I think that's a good foundation though.

An idea; what if task-based moves could be rolled with different stats? It does complicate things more, but I think it could fit. For example, in leading a team of ponies to complete some physical task, you could opt to roll either Loyalty to inspire them to work together, or Kindness to shower them with positive encouragement. The former might get the task done, but it could make the ponies under you see you as bossy and ask for you to do some humbling task in the future. The latter could also get the job done, but it carries the risk of not driving them hard enough, which could make the task take longer than expected.

Basically, your choice of stat used determines the consequences of completing the task and directly affects how the ponies of the town view you. As an added bonus, it means that you don't necessarily need all 5-6 stats.


Responsibility Move:

When you willingly accept a responsibility, hold 3. When you are tricked or forced into accepting, hold 1.

You can spend your hold at any time to:

- Placate someone who thinks you are failing/abandoning your responsibility
- Renounce your responsibility
- Convince someone to give you some aid towards the task

Interesting. Are there any consequences for renouncing a responsibility? Will Catastrophe trigger even if nopony's got a Responsibility assigned to them? Could this be used to bail on a Responsibility at the 11th hour, thus negating the Catastrophe?

[Madcrafter]

Thanqol, I am going to give you the playbooks for the #Whitebooks game. It's not as polished, but the basic idea is that there is no master of ceremonies. Each playbook has a few MC moves that are triggered by actions that naturally arise in the story, based on who is in the Protagonist role at the time.
An example is that whoever has the Exploration book starts off and describes the basic area, after discussion charts the basic adventure. The first time combat happens, the Combat playbook gets an interrupt, becomes temporary MC, and uses the moves in their book to flesh stuff out. If instead someone decides to Lead or Explore on their Own, a different playbook gets the lead. Etc.

This way you bypass the whole issue of 'how do I set up fronts in this sort of game' and make it every player's responsibility I saddle every other player with Responsibilities and tick down the calamity timer.Funnily enough, I had a similar idea for no MC last night. Basically, whenever a player needs a setting element that would ordinarily be provided by the MC, they ask the person who they have the highest Friendship (Hx) with (because if you don't know something, asking your friend seems like a good idea, even if it's done meta) who will then provide you with one. Then someone probably marks Friendship (either them or you) so that it keeps cycling and everyone gets a turn. It also encourages people to try and get high Fs scores, since then they get to do more world-building (or screw people if they're into that I guess).

This half-baked idea brought to you by the Union of Brains that won't shut up and go to sleep (UBSUS 503).


An idea; what if task-based moves could be rolled with different stats? It does complicate things more, but I think it could fit. For example, in leading a team of ponies to complete some physical task, you could opt to roll either Loyalty to inspire them to work together, or Kindness to shower them with positive encouragement. The former might get the task done, but it could make the ponies under you see you as bossy and ask for you to do some humbling task in the future. The latter could also get the job done, but it carries the risk of not driving them hard enough, which could make the task take longer than expected.

Basically, your choice of stat used determines the consequences of completing the task and directly affects how the ponies of the town view you. As an added bonus, it means that you don't necessarily need all 5-6 stats.So exactly like Defy Danger from DW, which can be rolled with any of the six stats depending on how you've described your response to some threat, and which you choose also might dictate the logical consequences.



Also, with these moves, how can I convince/coerce/cajole somepony into helping me (Seduce/Manipulate from AW)? The only way so far seems to be to spend a Hold from accepting a Responsibility.

[TheAmishPirate]

So exactly like Defy Danger from DW, which can be rolled with any of the six stats depending on how you've described your response to some threat, and which you choose also might dictate the logical consequences.

DW? Apologies, I'm not familiar with that system.

[SiuiS]

DW? Apologies, I'm not familiar with that system.

Dungeon world. I referenced it tangentially in that thing I sent.

Dungeon world is an AW hack designed to model fantasy adventure. It handles some things better than apocalypse world, because it establishes the power of the narrative to allow dice rather than just letting people toss dice.

In apocalypse world, you could say "I'm acting with empathy" and roll +kindness. In dungeon world, you would Roleplay sympathizing and that allows you to roll +kindness. No RP, no rolling. Prevents that whole "it doesn't matter what I actually do, I just roll +cool and win" thing.

[Madcrafter]

Oh really? AW doesn't work like that too (following from the fiction)? I guess I had forgotten, having read DW more recently, an. It explains the interpretation of that move I had earlier.

[SiuiS]

Oh really? AW doesn't work like that too (following from the fiction)? I guess I had forgotten, having read DW more recently, an. It explains the interpretation of that move I had earlier.

It does, but not explicitly.

DW has a trait Inch Thick Iron Wcales that Thanqol is probably tired of hearing about by now because it's my go-to example for stuff. In DW, that means whatever the ST says it does, up to and including "you cannot hurt this thing through mundane means", which means you need to Roleplay finding the gap in the scales or getting star metal on your sword or superheating the skin so it's softer or something; until that happens, you cannot roll an attack at all, period, nope. Before you satisfy the the RP condition, saying you attack gets a description about how it ricochets and maybe tickles. Afterward, then you can roll +Hard to go aggro.

This is why it's weird for me that people play and don't feel competent because their rolls might fail. Competency is "gets to roll", not "succeeds all the time", and MCs should be glossing over casual successes when players go against utterly inferior stuff all the time.

Apocalypse works lacks that inherent competency. There's much less glossing than if you're a mighty wizard or paladin, or a dragonblooded exalt or something.

[Thanqol]

Some things:

I'm considering stealing Seasonal Moves from the Dark Age playtest. Seasonal Moves are, 'what do you do during downtime?'

This has been problematic for me because I want long term things like building a house to be a major part of this game, but on the same token, if somepony commits to a six month project then time periods do have to be skipped over. Seasonal Moves let me do that neatly; additionally, DA's fortress design and mapgrid would provide a really awesome foundation for showing how your home/business/town expands. Also lets me clear a bit of design space in terms of, 'what do I roll to build a dam'.

I also think DA has a cute quirk in that if you end a season with any amount of leftover Harm, that remaining Harm becomes permanent. I think that'd be a nice trick to add to the savings-as-harm deal I've got going; if you have a bad run between seasons then you're going to come into the next season in just as bad a position. Permanent harm can be recovered one point at a time by ending a season with your savings at 100% of it's current capacity. E.g. if you've only got 2 savings capacity and you end the season at 2 then next season your capacity and current savings starts at 3.

I'm also thinking of making a move, 'When you resolve a Responsibility you gain X'. However I'm also thinking that these might be specific to the type of responsibility, or responsibility category. Concluding a Commerce responsibility might give gaining a savings point as the payoff, while concluding an Infrastructure responsibility might give, I dunno, civic pride or something.

I'm thinking of making the responsibilities with the really nasty consequences, like the dam busting or monsters attacking, be the ones that are really badly paid - thus creating perverse incentives and temptations.

[TheAmishPirate]

Is it possible for ponies to spend different amounts of time doing their seasonal moves? Or is it just "You all are getting a six-month break, tell me what project you work on." What happens when somebody doesn't have a project ready to go? Should their always be projects to work on?

[SiuiS]

It seems to me that not having a project is a valid choice. You don't get cash, but you don't get burdened either.

I'm seeing a hybrid cross between Facebook games like Burger Time, and Starcraft. You have to work to devote resources toc. Omelette jobs on time to get resources to devote to jobs etc., and eventually (soon?) you hit a point where the optimal move order and speed is not possible with a human mind – you cannot balance the equation, you are going to take a hit, and you need to decide where you feel you can take this hit (finances. Friendships, infrastructure, outputs) and try to keep trucking.

Only problem I see is that, unlike Thanqol's AW adventures, there's no clear and easy way to fix the death spiral. There is no summing of debts, and you don't get a happy ending. Yet. Future mechanical feedback should help there.

[Madcrafter]

So like D&D took the wargame and gave you complete control over a single individual, this will do the same to something more akin to SimCity or a Tycoon game?

[TheAmishPirate]

A thought occurs; what if management of the town's resources is a major factor in completing projects? There's only so much space, the river can only irrigate so many fields, there's only so many hooves to build things, etc. The town can grow and expand over time, but it's far, far easier to build on prepared, cleared land. Maybe something where the town gains land/water/resources at every Seasonal break, and each project takes a certain amount of resources to create. You don't just have to worry about your own development, but you have to stay on good terms with everybody so that you'll get your fair share of the land.

[Thanqol]

*snaps fingers* Of course! This is a game about persuading people to put aside their own desires for the common good!

So, every Playbook has a Core Responsibility - something they are fundamentally in charge of. These can either be relatively selfish - the Shopkeeper's CR is to grow their business - or relatively selfless - the Soldier's CR is to protect everyone against monsters. However, while the selfish playbooks generate more resources than the selfless ones, if the selfish playbooks don't regularly invest in their own path they won't realise their potential and the community will never grow.

Seasonal gaps, ponies will decide what their Seasonal Move is going to be. In play the Soldier might try and persuade the Shopkeeper to build a watchtower so he can check for monsters, pushing back that Front from Catastrophe. Spending her seasonal move on that instead of investing in her own business means she'll be more limited in the future though - dropping her savings and pushing her closer to that crisis point where bankruptcy looms.


E: I'm reading everyone's posts I just don't have brain to reply to them right now.

[SiuiS]

A thought occurs; what if management of the town's resources is a major factor in completing projects? There's only so much space, the river can only irrigate so many fields, there's only so many hooves to build things, etc. The town can grow and expand over time, but it's far, far easier to build on prepared, cleared land. Maybe something where the town gains land/water/resources at every Seasonal break, and each project takes a certain amount of resources to create. You don't just have to worry about your own development, but you have to stay on good terms with everybody so that you'll get your fair share of the land.

I don't know. That strikes me as a step too far? Like, one too many fractalated iterations. We should dial it back and focus on the core of things again. Too many directions to grow in and not enough growth is like planting twenty sticks and only one vine.

[Thanqol]

Oh, and following from the above thought, the only Fronts in play are the ones tied to the Core Responsibilities of the playbooks in play. This means that the selection of playbooks automatically defines the shapes of the problems they'll experience in play.

[Thanqol]

FIRST CONSOLIDATION/EDITING WAVE

BASIC MOVES:

HONESTY

Ask Your Friends For Help

When you want to ask your friends for help with a Problem, roll +Honesty

On a 10+ Both
On a 7-9 choose one:
- You can bring yourself to explain the problem out loud
- You can accept their help when they offer it




LOYALTY

Help Decide

When you help someone decide between two conflicting responsibilities, roll +Loyalty

10+: Both.
7-9: Pick one:
- They mark XP if they take your advice
- They Act Under Pressure if they don't



GENEROSITY

Do Something Nice
When you do something nice (gift/party/etc) for someone else, roll +Generous:

10+: Both
7-9: Pick one:
- You appreciate it
- They appreciate it



KINDNESS

Empathise With Someone
When you empathise with someone else roll +kind. On a 10+ mark 3, on a 7-9 mark 1. Over the course of the conversation you can spend those points to ask:
- How could I assure you that _?
- What is the crux of your resistance or reluctance?
- Who might win you over if I cannot?
- What is your character really feeling?
- Ask a question of your own. If the other player chooses to answer it, it stands, otherwise retract it and ask one of the above instead.



LAUGHTER

Act Under Pressure
When you act under pressure roll +laughter. On a 10+, choose 3, on 7-9 choose 1.

- You inspire _ to follow you
- You can manage one additional task at the same time
- You keep your cool
- You startle, shock or scatter _




Responsibility Move:

When you willingly accept a new responsibility, mark 3. When you are tricked, pressured or forced into accepting, mark 1.

You can spend your marked points at any time to:

- Placate someone who thinks you are failing/abandoning your responsibility
- Convince someone to give you some aid towards the task
- Admit that you have been defeated

[SiuiS]

"Admit that you have been defeated". Nice.

[TheAmishPirate]

I don't know. That strikes me as a step too far? Like, one too many fractalated iterations. We should dial it back and focus on the core of things again. Too many directions to grow in and not enough growth is like planting twenty sticks and only one vine.

That is a good point. If, say, Seasonal Moves can only be spent on one thing, then what you spend your Seasonal Move on is a resource in and of itself. You don't need an additional thing like usable land or other resources to further restrict things. Besides, leaving disputes like that open for RP, rather than tying them down explicitly in the mechanics strikes me as a good move.

Actually, on second read, I don't think that was your point exactly, but I've talked myself out of that idea anyway. All's well that ends well, I guess? :smallbiggrin:


So. Focusing on the core. Tired ramble time. There's a good base of what this system is all about. It's about working for the common good, and striking that bizarre, sometimes contradictory balance between selfishness and selflessness. It's about planting little seeds with little idea on how they'll turn out in the end. No idea what the endgame for this looks like, but then again, AW doesn't really have a built-in endgame either. The story ends when the story ends, and that's that.

Responsibilities seem fairly static. Once they're in, they're in, and aren't going to change until they're resolved. I can see how Problems might arise and shift how the Responsibility is met, but then we'd need a way for Problems to emerge organically. The MC can make Problems crop up as necessary, which is all well and good. But so far, there aren't ways for PCs to directly cause Problems with other PCs. What if resolving a Problem or making a major step towards meeting a Responsibility had "Give another PC a Problem" as one of its costs? If the other options were less beneficial to that player's Responsibility, and they can only choose a few of them, then it means that somepony has to take one for the team if they want to make meaningful progress.

After resolving a Problem, pick two:
-Mark Harm
-Give another PC a Problem
-Don't push back the Catastrophe clock on your Responsibility

Something like that, though likely not those options. That does carry the risk of a Problem treadmill, which may not be what we want. Going to sleep on all this.

[Madcrafter]

Ask Your Friends For Help

When you want to ask your friends for help with a Problem, roll +Honesty

On a 10+ Both
On a 7-9 choose one:
- You can bring yourself to explain the problem out loud
- You can accept their help when they offer it7-9 results still seem like failure with glimmerings of hope, rather than success with consequences or cost. They also seem to be able to shut down the scene very easily.
Also, a scenario:
AJ, falling over with exhaustion from bucking many an apple, wants to ask Twilight for help. She rolls an 8 and is stuck. She can choose "can accept help", but Twilight has her nose in a book and is not going to notice any signs of an issue, meaning that help never happens. Failure. She goes with "explain out loud" instead. Twilight is receptive and offers to help. AJ, suddenly feeling a surge of pride, must refuse. (Players are thus constrained in expressing their characters).
Twilight decides to help anyways, triggering the Do Something Nice move. She also rolls an 8, and chooses "AJ appreciates it". So AJ is too prideful to accept help, but still appreciates it? Depending on how this is played, it could be very strange.
Besides threat of a miss, which I am having trouble envisaging good consequences for, is there anything else stopping AJ from just asking a second time if she was unable to vocalize it once, but still wants help? Also, is there any limit to the help moratorium (maybe one time period)?


Help Decide

When you help someone decide between two conflicting responsibilities, roll +Loyalty

10+: Both.
7-9: Pick one:
- They mark XP if they take your advice
- They Act Under Pressure if they don'tI see where this is coming from I think ("I'm not taking Twilight's advice!" Cognitive Dissonance!). But what happens if no advice is given? Filly AJ, walking home, sees filly RD bucking in the clouds. She resolves that tomorrow, she will practice her iron pony competition instead of digging the irrigation ditch.
What about incentives to actually take the Act Under Pressure route besides player choice?


Do Something Nice
When you do something nice (gift/party/etc) for someone else, roll +Generous:

10+: Both
7-9: Pick one:
- You appreciate it
- They appreciate itHmm.


Emphasise With Someone
When you emphasise with someone else roll +kind. On a 10+ mark 3, on a 7-9 mark 1. Over the course of the conversation you can spend those points to ask:
- How could I assure you that _?
- What is the crux of your resistance or reluctance?
- Who might win you over if I cannot?
- What is your character really feeling?
- Ask a question of your own. If the other player chooses to answer it, it stands, otherwise retract it and ask one of the above instead.Is this supposed to be empathize? I don't know about the inclusion of the ask what you like option (might also want to specify you can only take it once).


Act Under Pressure
When you act under pressure roll +laughter. On a 10+, choose 3, on 7-9 choose 1.

- You inspire _ to follow you
- You can manage one additional task at the same time
- You keep your cool
- You startle, shock or scatter _Can you give an example of the last option here?



Responsibility Move:

When you willingly accept a new responsibility, mark 3. When you are tricked, pressured or forced into accepting, mark 1.

You can spend your marked points at any time to:

- Placate someone who thinks you are failing/abandoning your responsibility
- Convince someone to give you some aid towards the task
- Admit that you have been defeatedWhat happens when you lose your last mark, but the problem still eludes you? Can you never give up?

[Thanqol]

7-9 results still seem like failure with glimmerings of hope, rather than success with consequences or cost. They also seem to be able to shut down the scene very easily.
Also, a scenario:
AJ, falling over with exhaustion from bucking many an apple, wants to ask Twilight for help. She rolls an 8 and is stuck. She can choose "can accept help", but Twilight has her nose in a book and is not going to notice any signs of an issue, meaning that help never happens. Failure. She goes with "explain out loud" instead. Twilight is receptive and offers to help. AJ, suddenly feeling a surge of pride, must refuse. (Players are thus constrained in expressing their characters).

I have the feeling that this is best solved by giving some Playbooks in particular a reason to get all up in each other's sh*t. Also Twilight might notice once there's physical signs of the problem developing even if AJ can never bring herself to go across and ask.


Twilight decides to help anyways, triggering the Do Something Nice move. She also rolls an 8, and chooses "AJ appreciates it". So AJ is too prideful to accept help, but still appreciates it? Depending on how this is played, it could be very strange.

Do something nice needs mechanical elaboration I think.


Besides threat of a miss, which I am having trouble envisaging good consequences for, is there anything else stopping AJ from just asking a second time if she was unable to vocalize it once, but still wants help? Also, is there any limit to the help moratorium (maybe one time period)?

It's per Problem. AJ will have other problems that she might need help with.


I see where this is coming from I think ("I'm not taking Twilight's advice!" Cognitive Dissonance!). But what happens if no advice is given? Filly AJ, walking home, sees filly RD bucking in the clouds. She resolves that tomorrow, she will practice her iron pony competition instead of digging the irrigation ditch.

How is that helping someone decide? A move is descriptive and prescriptive. If RD doesn't do something to help AJ decide then there's no move. You might as well ask why seduce or manipulate allows telepathy.


What about incentives to actually take the Act Under Pressure route besides player choice?

'cause it's a stick. The XP is the carrot. The stick hits harder.


Is this supposed to be empathize? I don't know about the inclusion of the ask what you like option (might also want to specify you can only take it once).

Typo. I plan on revisiting these questions, they're ripped straight out of DA's +Good.


Can you give an example of the last option here?

Lesson zero.


What happens when you lose your last mark, but the problem still eludes you? Can you never give up?

Well no, not on that problem. You gotta keep hammering at it until the problem's solved. Which you'll be able to do, it just might cost you not solving more pressing problems.

[SiuiS]

7-9 results still seem like failure with glimmerings of hope, rather than success with consequences or cost. They also seem to be able to shut down the scene very easily.
Also, a scenario:
AJ, falling over with exhaustion from bucking many an apple, wants to ask Twilight for help. She rolls an 8 and is stuck. She can choose "can accept help", but Twilight has her nose in a book and is not going to notice any signs of an issue, meaning that help never happens. Failure. She goes with "explain out loud" instead. Twilight is receptive and offers to help. AJ, suddenly feeling a surge of pride, must refuse. (Players are thus constrained in expressing their characters).
Twilight decides to help anyways, triggering the Do Something Nice move. She also rolls an 8, and chooses "AJ appreciates it". So AJ is too prideful to accept help, but still appreciates it? Depending on how this is played, it could be very strange.

That's not strange at all and I've seen it happen. Have you ever seen people get into almost a fist fight over who gets to pay for each others' groceries? I have. It's a point of pride amongst Mexican gentleman in particular. Coworkers all stop by a convenience store on the way to a job site, and try argue about whose outstretched bill the cashier should take.

On hand one, they want to pay. On hand two, they want to keep their money. It's jockeying between pride and practicality and influences their internal politics.



I see where this is coming from I think ("I'm not taking Twilight's advice!" Cognitive Dissonance!). But what happens if no advice is given? Filly AJ, walking home, sees filly RD bucking in the clouds. She resolves that tomorrow, she will practice her iron pony competition instead of digging the irrigation ditch.

... That's not RD doing something. That's AJ seeing something. Not a move.

[Madcrafter]

I have the feeling that this is best solved by giving some Playbooks in particular a reason to get all up in each other's sh*t. Also Twilight might notice once there's physical signs of the problem developing even if AJ can never bring herself to go across and ask.That might rely on the player using their OOC knowledge though. Which is fine, as long as it's clear.



How is that helping someone decide? A move is descriptive and prescriptive. If RD doesn't do something to help AJ decide then there's no move. You might as well ask why seduce or manipulate allows telepathy.It was the first thing that popped into my mind so it could occur to others (though not a problem if you don't intend for any sort of distribution). RD is helping AJ decide by a demonstration of athletic ability, inspiration. Regardless, doesn't seem like anyone agrees, so that's fine.



'cause it's a stick. The XP is the carrot. The stick hits harder.I mean for "they".


Lesson zero.Hmm, I see it as three positive choices and one negative one then. So would you choose it?


That's not strange at all and I've seen it happen. Have you ever seen people get into almost a fist fight over who gets to pay for each others' groceries? I have. It's a point of pride amongst Mexican gentleman in particular. Coworkers all stop by a convenience store on the way to a job site, and try argue about whose outstretched bill the cashier should take.

On hand one, they want to pay. On hand two, they want to keep their money. It's jockeying between pride and practicality and influences their internal politics.Which is why I put a could be in there. I know it wouldn't be always.

[SiuiS]

Which is why I put a could be in there. I know it wouldn't be always.

I believe that while any situation we contrive here may indeed be strange, any situation which occurs in game would have enough context to not be strange. It wouldn't be the first time a game ran smoother than it was explained.

[Thanqol]

http://www.fimfiction-static.net/images/story_images/210765.png?1408158410

"Oh my, did you really think I wasn't going to be a part of this? This little sickeningly sweet game about talking about your problems and building happy little communities? Oh-ho-ho-ho-hoo, you're in for a treat my little ponies!

"Here's how it works. Every one of the basic moves has it's evil opposite: The far superior and more useful Discord Move! Discord moves replace that boring highlight system and let ponies actually solve their problems for a change! Let's take a look!


Flipped Honesty: Useful Lies

While your Honesty is flipped you can't tell anyone about your problems. Sorry folks!

But what you can do is roll +Honesty when you try to lie to get someone else to do your work.

If it's a PC:
On a 10+ Transfer one of your responsibilities to them. They mark 1 in the usual fashion.
On a 7-9 they have to give you some aid towards one of your problems, as if you'd spent a marked point against them.

If it's a NPC:
On a 10+ They'll help you with the project for as long as the lie holds!
On a 7-9 they have to give you some aid towards one of your problems, as if you'd spent a marked point against them.



Flipped Loyalty: Feud

While your Loyalty is flipped you can't help other people decide between their problems BUT WHY WOULD YOU WANT TO?

But what you can do is roll +Loyalty when you punish those who have crossed you! Why encourage them to pick your side when you can RUIN EVERYONE ELSE'S SIDES?

10+: Give them a new Problem of your choice and get away clean.
7-9: Give them a new Problem, but they know you're to blame for it.


Flipped Generosity: Due Credit

While your Generosity is flipped you don't act for free and you can't do nice things for others, which is good because you're not running a charity. Unless you're actually running a charity in which case we call this overhead.

But when someone else has accomplished something, you surely deserve a bit of that, right? Roll +Generosity when you claim the credit for someone else's resolved problem or responsibility.

10+: You're recognised as the real mind behind the success and you get the lion's share of the credit and all the rewards!
7-9: You're recognised as having made a valuable contribution and get a partial share of the credit and rewards!


Flipped Kindness: Where They're Weak

You have been kind for too long! IT'S TIME TO BE CRUEL! While your Kindness is flipped you cannot empathise with anyone else.

The more than adequate consolation for this is the ability to look for weaknesses and roll +Kind (10+ ask 3, 7-9 ask 1 blah blah) in order ask questions off the following list:

- How could I get you to _?
- What here is the most valuable to you?
- Who has the most leverage over you?
- Where is your character weak to me?


Flipped Laughter: Centre Of Attention

What you COULD do is run yourself ragged multitasking to get everything done before the deadline. You know, if you were an idiot.

But what you SHOULD do is bare your pain and struggle for all to see, make yourself the centre of attention, and roll +laughter!

On a 10+: They can't make meaningful progress towards any of their own problems until your problem is dealt with first!
On a 7-9: They can't make meaningful progress towards any of their own problems until they've given you some aid towards your problem!


You're WELCOME."

[SiuiS]

Holy damn, son.

[Thanqol]

So, the eleven basic moves are:

Ask Your Friends - Tell Useful Lies
Help Decide - Feud
Do Something Nice - Steal The Credit
Empathise - Look For Weakness
Act Under Pressure - Centre of Attention

Responsibility

Draw a line under it, that's done, apart from the editing and followup of course. I'm inordinately proud of those because they cover 90% of what happens in Friendship is Magic.

The Peripheral Moves are:

Savings and Bankruptcy Moves:

All ponies have collected savings, a nest egg of money to get them through the bad times. The savings levels are:

Flush with cash 6
In the black 5
Breaking even 4

Treading water 3
In the red 2
Scraping by 1

When you hit 0 you are bankrupt.

At the start of each session, you gain cash equal to half your current savings level, round up.

When you try to make something big happen with money, roll+cash spent (minimum 1, maximum 3).

10+: It happens just like that.
7-9: It happens, but there's a complication.
6: It happens with nothing but complications.

When you dip into your savings, gain a number of points of cash equal to your savings level, and then reduce your savings level by 1.

When you give someone a point of cash worth of gifts it counts as doing something nice for them and hitting on a 10+.

@^ I am deeply unsure of all these moves and the economy they imply. Anyone got any better ideas?

EDIT: After some thought I'm certainly going to utterly revise these, so I'm just leaving this post here for posterity. I need to figure out how much money should be in the economy and how much of it is going to be coming out and the numbers here are too big.

EDIT EDIT: Perhaps, moves that interact with Savings are primarily MC moves. Moves that generate cash are primarily playbook moves. Cash is daily money and disconnected from savings. Savings can only be raised through seasonal moves, perhaps something like:

Roll +cash spent:
10+: You increase your savings by one level
7-9: You increase your savings by one level but lose any unspent cash you still possess.

So the more cash you're spending the 'safer' your investment.

[Thanqol]

I really like how organically this system's growing. It's like it's writing itself most of the time. Anyway, I'll work out the specific Barter moves later, for now the only principles I need are:

- Barter is walking around money, similar to AW barter. I decided to go back to barter rather than cash after watching the trading episode and realising that these ponies don't really have a functional economy
- Savings is srs bsnss money, similar to AW Harm
- Savings and infrastructure are dealt with using Season Moves, the moves that kick in during downtime. You only get one season move per interval so where you spend it is a big choice. Losing a point of Savings is a big deal.
- Barter is generated by your playbook and is used to solve short term problems. There may be a move where you can dip into your savings to generate a pile of temporary barter but I'm really caught up on the math.

Anyway, after I've got the barter system sorted out I'll have the totality of the core mechanic. That'll make it time to start thinking about Principles and Playbooks.

Playbook Names and themes:

The Princess: Make sure everyone is working together harmoniously, at all costs.

The Mayor: Make the town more prestigious than your regional rivals!

The Shopkeeper: Spread and grow your business and connect to the big city elite!

The Guardian: Defend the borders of reality against the strange and magical.

The Sheriff: Keep everypony safe and secure against monsters and criminals.

The Farmer: Help your family grow and thrive.

The Entertainer: Become the greatest star around

The Assistant: Support your master through hard times

[TheAmishPirate]

Anyway, after I've got the barter system sorted out I'll have the totality of the core mechanic. That'll make it time to start thinking about Principles and Playbooks.

In that case, here's what I, as an outside observer, don't see in the rules yet. Keep in mind that I do not own nor have I read the AW main book, so some of this might come down to stuff I haven't read about:

-What is the relationship between Problems and Responsibilities? How are Problems generated? How are they resolved? What are the consequences of resolving a Problem? What are the consequences of not resolving a Problem? Can a Responsibility be resolved if it still has Problems?
-How does a pony flip a stat from Harmonic to Discordant? What does it take to flip back? If it replaces the highlight system, does that mean you mark experience by rolling a Discordant stat?
-Where's the Friendship? Is there any mechanical representation of relationships, or is everything just business?

I also don't see any mechanical benefits to added infrastructure, but I suspect that's coming in the playbooks. Same could be said for these mechanics as well, but it doesn't hurt to make sure.


- Barter is walking around money, similar to AW barter. I decided to go back to barter rather than cash after watching the trading episode and realising that these ponies don't really have a functional economy
- Savings is srs bsnss money, similar to AW Harm
- Savings and infrastructure are dealt with using Season Moves, the moves that kick in during downtime. You only get one season move per interval so where you spend it is a big choice. Losing a point of Savings is a big deal.
- Barter is generated by your playbook and is used to solve short term problems. There may be a move where you can dip into your savings to generate a pile of temporary barter but I'm really caught up on the math.

What about things that don't require money? If one of your Problems is "My workers don't get along", and you take them both out for a Saturday at Ponyville Lake, it's conceivable you could solve the Problem via rolling without spending a bit. Or are these lowercase problems we're talking about?

My thought is that if it's legit Problems, then that raises the question of whether or not all Problems can/should be able to be solved without spending Barter.


Playbook Names and themes:

*snip*

Which of these do you consider to be "selfish" playbooks, and which do you consider to be "selfless"?

[Madcrafter]

Hooo, interesting.

[Thanqol]

In that case, here's what I, as an outside observer, don't see in the rules yet. Keep in mind that I do not own nor have I read the AW main book, so some of this might come down to stuff I haven't read about:

-What is the relationship between Problems and Responsibilities? How are Problems generated? How are they resolved? What are the consequences of resolving a Problem? What are the consequences of not resolving a Problem? Can a Responsibility be resolved if it still has Problems?

Oh yeah, you're right, I should nail this down before I move on to playbooks. Slipped my mind.


-How does a pony flip a stat from Harmonic to Discordant? What does it take to flip back? If it replaces the highlight system, does that mean you mark experience by rolling a Discordant stat?

I'm thinking it's an OOC thing like highlighting, as in 'let's see what Rarity's like when she's feuding with someone'. I don't know how that's determined, I have a vague notion of a best friends mechanic.


-Where's the Friendship? Is there any mechanical representation of relationships, or is everything just business?

Need thinking time. Considering, like I said, a stat that says 'your best friend is X' and then having some effects that hang off that. Don't know though that seems like it could lead to pairing off - OH OBVIOUSLY, BEST FRIENDS IS DONE JUST LIKE HIGHLIGHTING. So it'd be like, "I want to see Applejack and Rarity in the same episode" and then give xp whenever AJ uses a move on Rarity. BAM.


I also don't see any mechanical benefits to added infrastructure, but I suspect that's coming in the playbooks. Same could be said for these mechanics as well, but it doesn't hurt to make sure.

What are the benefits to added infrastructure in AW?

The answer is the MC stops describing your life as sh*tty all the time.

That's a big deal.


What about things that don't require money? If one of your Problems is "My workers don't get along", and you take them both out for a Saturday at Ponyville Lake, it's conceivable you could solve the Problem via rolling without spending a bit. Or are these lowercase problems we're talking about?

My thought is that if it's legit Problems, then that raises the question of whether or not all Problems can/should be able to be solved without spending Barter.

I'm not sure what the point here is.


Which of these do you consider to be "selfish" playbooks, and which do you consider to be "selfless"?

Selfish: (ones that generate wealth)
- Mayor
- Shopkeeper
- Farmer
- Entertainer

Selfless: (ones that consume wealth)
- Princess
- Sheriff
- Guardian
- Assistant

[TheAmishPirate]

I'm thinking it's an OOC thing like highlighting, as in 'let's see what Rarity's like when she's feuding with someone'. I don't know how that's determined, I have a vague notion of a best friends mechanic.

What worries me here is that each Discordant move comes with a rather nasty downside and a rather significant in-character effect. It'd be odd to come up with reasons on the fly as to why my pony is suddenly more selfish, more disagreeable, etc. Plus, highlighting a stat is an encouragement for a PC to play up a certain side of their PC, even if they're not usually good at it. This is requiring a PC to lock into a mode of behavior - with significant drawbacks - until some manner of condition is met. Doesn't seem to fit.

From what we saw in the show, it almost seems like this should be a triggered thing in a manner similar to Darkest Self. The ponies didn't start acting up until they made a decision against their element - or failed enough Spot checks to notice Discord messing with them - and then they became their Discordant selves. No clue how you'd get out of it, but that's how I see it playing out.


Need thinking time. Considering, like I said, a stat that says 'your best friend is X' and then having some effects that hang off that. Don't know though that seems like it could lead to pairing off - OH OBVIOUSLY, BEST FRIENDS IS DONE JUST LIKE HIGHLIGHTING. So it'd be like, "I want to see Applejack and Rarity in the same episode" and then give xp whenever AJ uses a move on Rarity. BAM.

Oooh, I approve. Especially since it highlights the fact that your best friend is not necessarily a static thing, and can change/fluctuate over time.


What are the benefits to added infrastructure in AW?

The answer is the MC stops describing your life as sh*tty all the time.

That's a big deal.

Fair point.


I'm not sure what the point here is.

It's a design intent question more than anything. The point of Barter is that it's used to solve Problems, if I'm reading it right. I can conceive of a situation in which a Problem could be reasonably solved without spending a single Bit, and instead through maneuvering into a more favorable position and rolling well. Thus, the system of using Barter to solve Problems can be circumvented for some Problems. I want to know if the same is true of all Problems, or if there are Problems that simply cannot be solved without spending Barter.

If there are Problems that can't be circumvented, how is this communicated to the PCs?

If all Problems can be circumvented, what does this mean for the economy of the game? If you don't ever spend Barter, what's the downside of taking Harm?

[Madcrafter]

What worries me here is that each Discordant move comes with a rather nasty downside and a rather significant in-character effect. It'd be odd to come up with reasons on the fly as to why my pony is suddenly more selfish, more disagreeable, etc. Plus, highlighting a stat is an encouragement for a PC to play up a certain side of their PC, even if they're not usually good at it. This is requiring a PC to lock into a mode of behavior - with significant drawbacks - until some manner of condition is met. Doesn't seem to fit.

From what we saw in the show, it almost seems like this should be a triggered thing in a manner similar to Darkest Self. The ponies didn't start acting up until they made a decision against their element - or failed enough Spot checks to notice Discord messing with them - and then they became their Discordant selves. No clue how you'd get out of it, but that's how I see it playing out.This is something I keep getting the vibe of; "your character must suddenly act like this" type results.

Though as an analogue to darkest self is a neat idea. Maybe it can happen as a result of going bankrupt?

[Thanqol]

@^ Fair points. I'll think about them carefully during the next editing wave.

Right now, let's finish getting core mechanics out of the way with RESPONSIBILITIES!


Responsibilities come in eight different Groups. Resolving a responsibility gives you some kind of reward. Failing a responsibility gives you some kind of catastrophe. Each Playbook has a Core Responsibility Group which defines the type of stories that playbook brings to the table. A Playbook will always have at least one Responsibility from their Core Group.

The groups are:

CIVIC RESPONSIBILITIES
Playbook: Mayor
Type: Responsibilities to do with the town, the community, major infrastructure or necessary tasks.

Examples: Dam repair, Winter Wrap Up, water hurricanes, schedule thunderstorm, etc.
Problems: Union strikes, disorganisation, factionalism, laziness, weather events
Rewards: Power, prestige, connections, large cash payouts, visits from royalty
Catastrophes: Have to be bailed out by the central government, savings hit, loss of prestige, blamed, someone gets injured

BUSINESS RESPONSIBILITIES
Playbook: Shopkeeper
Type: Responsibilities to do with running, maintaining and expanding your business

Examples: Produce dresses, bake goods, open new shops, pay taxes, etc
Problems: Needy or shifty clients, bureaucratic oversight, price hikes, late deliveries
Rewards: Connections, fame, large cash payouts, small cash payouts, gratitude
Catastrophes: Savings hit, lose connections, publicly embarrassed, disappoint someone

HEARTH RESPONSIBILITIES
Playbook: Farmer
Type: Responsibilities to do with your own family and living situation

Examples: Repair house, live in comfort, family member visiting, younger sibling needs help, etc
Problems: Sibling acting out, termites, fire, injury, scammers
Rewards: Domestic bliss, small cash payouts, gratitude
Catastrophes: Domestic turmoil, savings hit, worsened living conditions

STAGE RESPONSIBILITIES
Playbook: Entertainer
Type: Responsibilities to do with making sure people have a good time

Examples: Throw birthday party, sing in a quartet, practice your awesome flying moves, manage an event
Problems: Someone is a jerk, stage fright, injury, tough audience
Rewards: Public adoration, connections, glory, large cash payouts, create joy
Catastrophes: Ruin someone's party, make an enemy, public humiliation

---

DEFENCE RESPONSIBILITIES
Playbook: Sheriff
Type: Responsibilities to do with keeping safe from mid-level threats.

Examples: Criminal, rival, monster, thief, changelings
Problems: Someone is protecting the threat, threat has significant power, threat's identity is obscured
Rewards: Small cash payouts, respect
Catastrophes: Crime spree, public humiliation, someone is injured, someone is kidnapped

MAGICAL RESPONSIBILITIES
Playbook: Guardian
Type: Responsibilities to do with keeping safe from high level threats

Examples: Defend spacetime, manage the Everfree Forest, unravel a dark spell, ancient evil has returned
Problems: Someone is protecting the threat, threat's identity is obscured, threat is more powerful than expected, threat only has one specific weakness
Rewards: Public accolades, Princesshood, nothing
Catastrophes: Really bad ones.

PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITIES
Playbook: Assistant
Type: Your responsibilities to one specific person

Examples: Serve your master, dating, follow through on a promise, do someone a favour
Problems: Problem is outside your skill set, work is wearying or boring, friend won't accept your help
Rewards: Acknowledgement, friendship
Catastrophes: Public humiliation, strife, disappoint someone

FRIENDSHIP RESPONSIBILITIES*
Playbook: Princess
Type: Your responsibilities to your circle of friends

Examples: Two friends are feuding, friend is a jerk, friend is neglecting responsibilities
Problems: Not listening to reason, under someone's sway, blinded by personal flaws
Rewards: Better quality friends
Catastrophes: Hurt someone's feelings, lose a friend, strife

* Not sure about this one, or this playbook in general

[Ezeze]

This looks really cool, and I'd totally be down to start play testing it as soon as we get some more basics in place :smallwink:


Some other thoughts;

Responsibility Move:

When you willingly accept a responsibility, hold 3. When you are tricked or forced into accepting, hold 1.

You can spend your hold at any time to:

- Placate someone who thinks you are failing/abandoning your responsibility
- Renounce your responsibility
- Convince someone to give you some aid towards the task
So if I willingly accept a responsibility, then turn around one second later and abandon it, I'm up 2 holds? :smallconfused:




the only Fronts in play are the ones tied to the Core Responsibilities of the playbooks in play. This means that the selection of playbooks automatically defines the shapes of the problems they'll experience in play.
This is good because it means that you can adapt a game to accommodate a wide range of players (group of 3? No problem! Group of 7? No problem either!) and also good because it means the PCs get to define - through their playbook choice - what sort of problems they are going to be facing.

But it's also bad because it sort of contributes to an overall feeling of futility. If I am, for example, playing a soldier - it would make the game a great deal less fun for me if I knew that the monsters I was protecting everyone from only existed to give me something to do. In this situation my friends are no better off if I try and succeed, but worse off if I try and fail, so where is the incentive to try (in this case, join the game) at all?

I wonder if anyone here has ever played Pandemic? It's a board game based around the idea that there is, well, a pandemic :smalltongue: The players are working together to try and cure it before civilization is irrecoverably destroyed. Each player picks a role - a medic, scientist, researcher, quarantine specialist or a number of others. Now each player can solve any problem, so there are no restrictions on which of the problems can come up (since this is a board game they are randomized, but they wouldn't have to be in a game with a GM) but each player has a specialty that makes them better than all of the others at solving -specific- problems, whether that be because they can do it faster or better or with fewer resources. So even though the number of problems increases with the number of players, the chances that you'll have the right solution to any specific problem also increases - which means that the game can handle a large range of players without making problems specifically for those players to deal with. This also leads to some surprising opportunities for synergy, and incentivises group cooperation.



But combine this idea with the idea that everyone is granted XP/cash/whatever else they might want on their own and you end up in a situation where optimal for everyone is everyone working together, but optimal for any one person is being able to pursue their own goals. You are setting up a Tragedy of the Commons (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tragedy_of_the_commons) and giving your players the tools they need to work through it but not guaranteeing success.


Edit: The tragedy being less that they run out of one particular resource and more that a catastrophe happens.... Adding an element of resource management to it all might make peoples' heads spin :smalltongue:

I... Don't know if I'm being clear? :smallconfused:

[SiuiS]

Good catch. You would be up by 2 hold, but also still suffer from the responsibility's downside. It's not part ways with it, it's surrendering (losing).

[Thanqol]

Some other thoughts;

So if I willingly accept a responsibility, then turn around one second later and abandon it, I'm up 2 holds? :smallconfused:

This has been adjusted to 'admitting defeat'.

I'm not sure if hold translates between responsibilities yet.

You have also gone through the narrative consequence of actively betraying someone's trust right to their face.


But it's also bad because it sort of contributes to an overall feeling of futility. If I am, for example, playing a soldier - it would make the game a great deal less fun for me if I knew that the monsters I was protecting everyone from only existed to give me something to do. In this situation my friends are no better off if I try and succeed, but worse off if I try and fail, so where is the incentive to try (in this case, join the game) at all?

That's a really weird concern. It's, like, if I didn't play D&D then those monsters wouldn't exist so why play?

Also you can absolutely get responsibilities outside of your Core Responsibility. Even if no one plays a Guardian there'll still be Magic Responsibilities coming up. It's just that the Guardian always has a Magic responsibility in addition to whatever else they've got going.


But combine this idea with the idea that everyone is granted XP/cash/whatever else they might want on their own and you end up in a situation where optimal for everyone is everyone working together, but optimal for any one person is being able to pursue their own goals. You are setting up a Tragedy of the Commons (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tragedy_of_the_commons) and giving your players the tools they need to work through it but not guaranteeing success.


I... Don't know if I'm being clear? :smallconfused:

Finding that balance point between community and individual is an explicit design goal. A sub design goal is to make sure everyone has their own idea of what the best endgame is. The Shopkeeper thinks they can improve everyone's lives, not just their own, by reaching the heights of fame and fortune - i.e. get to the top and then fix problems from there. The Guardian, on the other hand, knows that these things have to be stopped NOW and investing in a business is frivolous and dangerous for a payout that might never come.

Stuff like that.

[Ezeze]

That's a really weird concern. It's, like, if I didn't play D&D then those monsters wouldn't exist so why play?
Well no, because your friends would still be playing. But the analogy is not quite perfect because in D&D monsters are general problems - literally any class could deal with them with the same level of efficacy (barring power imbalances, but that's a design flaw and not a game feature...)

I'm trying to get at, like, letting 2 ponies cooperating achieve more than 2x what one pony working alone could. Enabling, in a word, synergy.

Liike.... Okay...

My friends are playing and they picked a Shopkeeper, a Sheriff and a Farmer. So they have a slight advantage in dealing with any problems relating to business, security or growing food, but deal with all of the rest of the problems at the baseline level - any of which could come up!

So I come in and decide to play a Guardian. The same possible problems could come up - in fact there are more problems overall, since the GM increases the challenge level to account for more players - but now in addition the group also has a slight advantage in dealing with magic-related threats, so even though there are more problems the group is overall still in a better position because I joined.

[Thanqol]

And if you were playing D&D, an additional party member means all fights have to be slightly more difficult because otherwise it'd be a walk-over. It's the illusion of balance.

I don't think you get the mindset behind *world games. The goal is not to have everyone team up and go win something. Like, if everyone in Apocalypse World teamed up and stormed Tum Tum's fortress then that'd be a sweet moment and everything but mechanically they get nothing out of it. The system is not designed to promote that kind of play. Only one person can help another person at a time and even then they'd only give a +1. What happens far more frequently is the party turns into infighting, standoffs and cautious alliances of convenience.

I don't want the group to have an advantage because somebody new joined. That'd be ass backwards. I want the group to be more interesting because somebody new joined. That means new problems. The win state for this game is, 'you have fun playing it', not 'you build a perfect utopia and solve all your problems', because that usually means you have to stop playing.

[Ezeze]

Well, yes, in Apocalypse World or Monster Hearts, but I thought the entire point of My Little Pony was that Friendship is Magic? :smallwink:

[Thanqol]

Well, yes, in Apocalypse World or Monster Hearts, but I thought the entire point of My Little Pony was that Friendship is Magic? :smallwink:

Have you watched this show? It's all secrets and lies with these ponies. Secrets and lies! Friendship saves the day at the end after they've spent 20 minutes spiralling around the depths of madness and obsession.

[Ezeze]

ROFL, well, then I rescind my objection :smallwink:

[Thanqol]

Just doing this so I know where all my mechanics are.

DRAFT PLAYBOOK STRUCTURE

SIDE 1:

Name
Look
Finances/Gear

Stats:
+2, +1, +1, 0, -1

Harmony - Discord
(*) HONESTY () - Ask Your Friends / Get Others To Work
(*) LOYALTY () - Help Decide / Feud
(*) GENEROSITY () - Do Something Nice / Take The Credit
(*) KINDNESS () - Empathise - Look For Weakness
() LAUGHTER (*) - Act Under Pressure - Centre of Attention

BEST FRIEND:

Moves:
-
-
-
-

Side 2:

Responsibility Move

Core Responsibility:
Problems:
Hold:

Secondary Responsibility:
Problems:
Hold:

Tertiary Responsibility:
Problems:
Hold:

Home:
Wants, projects

Art/Introducing

[Thanqol]

THE HEARTH

By default your home has enough space for you and any family members who live with you.

What is the nature of your home? Choose 1.

- A hollowed out tree
- A wooden building in the town centre
- A gathering of clouds
- A country manor
- A forest cottage
- A structure of stone and earth
- An older ruin
- A tower or lookout
- Or as you choose

What are it's biggest problems? Choose 2.

- Termites, parasprites and insect pests
- Bordering the Everfree
- Shoddy construction
- Ancient curse or secrets
- Loud, grumpy or feuding neighbours
- Looks hideous/overgrown
- Finances in arrears
- Public access
- Profoundly uncomfortable
- Inconvenient location
- Attracts monsters
- Someone wants it/wants it gone

What does your household contain? Choose 2

- An armoury
- A bridge
- A dairy
- Farmland
- Fine furnishings
- A kitchen and pantry
- A lake
- A library
- A wardrobe of fine outfits
- Music equipment
- Treasures, antiques and curios
- A basement or cellar
- A guest bedroom
- A river
- A greenhouse
- Accommodation for many animals
- A pet or pets
- Fortifications
- A sacred shrine
- Vast amounts of miscellaneous clutter
- Potions and cauldrons
- Medical facilities
- Orchards or vineyards
- Intimidating décor
- Majestic exterior
- Luxury bathroom
- A smithy
- Carpentry tools
- Expanses of empty land
- A shopfront
- A great hall
- A beautiful garden
- A magical location
- Tunnels and hidden passages
- A prison or a vault
- An astrological observatory

IMPROVEMENT:
(): Repair a damaged improvement
(): Stock supplies and provisions
()()(): Add a permanent improvement
()()(): Add a new room
()()(): Purchase a secondary home, begins with no improvements

SEASONAL MOVES:

Tend To Your Home:
When you spend the season working on your home, roll +barter (minimum 1) spent.
10+: Fill in two circles
7-9: Fill in one circle

Work For Another:
When you spend the season working for someone else, roll +laughter. On a 10+ choose 2 of the following, on a 7-9 choose 1:
- You begin the new season with two barter worth of pay (otherwise you begin with 1)
- You begin the season comfortable and unstressed (otherwise you are exhausted from your labours)
- You begin the season having discharged your obligations entirely

Invest Your Money
When you spend the season working on your savings, roll +barter (minimum 1) spent:
10+: Increase your savings by one level, and regain a point of barter
7-9: Increase your savings by one level.

Travel:
When you spend the season travelling to strange new places, roll +barter spent:
10+: Choose two
7-9: Choose one

You return with an exotic item, trick or technique.
You return refreshed and relaxed
You return with news and stories from afar, preparing you for what comes

Work For All:
When you spend the season working to benefit with your community, roll +Generous.
10+: Erase any two problems
7-9: Erase any one problem

[Thanqol]

Introducing,

THE FARMER

"At the end of the day, what everyone really wants is a roof over your head and a family to come home to. Everythin' else is built on top of that."

CORE RESPONSIBILITY: Hearth

Stats: +2 Honesty, +1, +1, 0, -1

Moves: All the basic moves, pick two Farmer moves.

Savings: Breaking Even 4

Farmer Special: When you date someone else, that person counts as a member of your family.

Moves:
It All Begins At Home: When you work on your home you may roll +Honesty instead of spending Barter.

Many hands, Light Work: You have a sibling who can help you out. Pick one:
* Talented: Your sibling is really good at something; you decide what it is
* Reliable: Your sibling just doesn't have any drama in his life.
* Watchful: Your sibling will sometimes identify problems before they arise.

Granddaddy built this farm: Add 2 improvements to your home.

Cash Crops: At the start of every Season gain one Barter.

Heart of the Family: You automatically become aware of any problems that have to do with your family members and can tell them about your problems without a roll.

Seeds On The Breeze: Your family is widespread and important. When you go somewhere new you can always find a family member to meet up with or stay with.

[Thanqol]

Introducing,

THE GUARDIAN

"Don't have any money? You know why I don't have any money? BECAUSE I SPENT THE LAST SIX MONTHS WRESTLING THE NIGHTMARE DIMENSION, YOU UNGRATEFUL BASTARD!"

Core responsibility: Magic

Stats: +2 Laughter, +1, +1, 0, -1

Moves: All the basic moves, pick 2 Guardian moves

Savings: In the red 2

Guardian Special: When you date someone else, that person's love might be a valuable component in fighting evil.

Moves:
Enormous Capacity For Violence: When you get in a fight you are prepared and ready for, you will probably win and never straight up lose.

Books! I love books!: When you encounter a strange new Problem, go to the books and roll with the number of people assisting you:
10+ choose 2:
7-9: choose 1:
Ask the MC a question, they must answer truthfully.
The MC must create a secret weakness for one magical NPC and tell you what it is.
You don't find any knowledge in the books, but you find something else that can help you with your problem while researching (MC's decision)
Take +1 Ongoing against this Problem

Eccentric: You're obviously too crazy and useless to be trusted with any real responsibility. Whenever a catastrophe happens you catch none of the blame.

Mentor Figure: You have a mentor or mentors you can turn to when you need assistance. Pick one:
- Important: Your mentor has great political importance.
- Powerful: Your mentor has vast personal prowess
- Wise: Your mentor always knows just the right thing to say

I Told You This Was Important!: When a Magical problem reveals itself you gain access to Centre of Attention and Act Under Pressure at the same time.

Save The World Off Camera: When you work to benefit your community, if you succeed you may erase an additional problem.

[Thanqol]

SECOND CONSOLIDATION/EDITING WAVE

Generosity and Loyalty basic moves have been rewritten. Responsibilities in conflict don't seem to be common enough to justify Help Decide so that's axed and replaced with Help Out. What they get out of being helped out is vague but this is not going to be a system where you roll +woodwind instruments or +concrete foundationing or +applebucking. When the ponies help out Applejack in the cider episode it doesn't matter what their skillsets actually are, they bullsh*t a way for them to all usefully contribute and that's what this is.

Generosity has been rewritten because I agree that a 7-9 is too close to being a failure. Now that stuff's all in the territory of six or less and Do Something Nice is, well, just doing something nice.

BASIC MOVES:

HONESTY

Ask Your Friends For Help

When you want to ask your friends for help with one of your Problems, roll +Honesty

On a 10+ Both
On a 7-9 choose one:
- You can bring yourself to explain the problem out loud
- You can accept their help when they offer it




LOYALTY

Help Out
When you help someone out roll +Loyalty
10+: You significantly help them with whatever they're trying to accomplish.
7-9: You make a useful contribution to their task



GENEROSITY

Do Something Nice
When you do something nice (gift/party/etc) for someone else, roll +Generous:

10+: Pick two
7-9: Pick one:
- They take +1 forwards
- They admire and respect your work
- You can relieve them of their stress, panic or sadness



KINDNESS

Empathise With Someone
When you empathise with someone else roll +kind. On a 10+ mark 3, on a 7-9 mark 1. Over the course of the conversation you can spend those points to ask:
- How could I assure you that _?
- What is the crux of your resistance or reluctance?
- Who might win you over if I cannot?
- What is your character really feeling?




LAUGHTER

Act Under Pressure
When you act under pressure roll +laughter. On a 10+, choose 3, on 7-9 choose 1.

- You inspire _ to follow you
- You can manage one additional task at the same time
- You keep your cool
- You startle, shock or scatter _




Responsibility Move:

When you willingly accept a new responsibility, mark 3. When you are tricked, pressured or forced into accepting, mark 1.

You can spend your marked points at any time to:

- Placate someone who thinks you are failing/abandoning your responsibility
- Convince someone to give you some aid towards the task
- Admit that you have been defeated

[Anarion]

Poking this for a minute. I have to run to work, but I'll review the three pages of dense material over the next day or two and edit in my thoughts in this spot.

[Madcrafter]

I like these moves much more now. Two things:
- You might consider adding a cost to Help Someone Out 7-9.
- I still don't quite get the last choice in Act Under Pressure.

Will take a look at the playbooks later.

[SiuiS]

I like these moves much more now. Two things:
- You might consider adding a cost to Help Someone Out 7-9.
- I still don't quite get the last choice in Act Under Pressure.

Will take a look at the playbooks later.

Looks like a stall / offensive use.

[Madcrafter]

Looks like a stall / offensive use.

Ah that makes some sense. I didn't think of targeting something negative with it, since the other results are positive focused.

[SiuiS]

Ah that makes some sense. I didn't think of targeting something negative with it, since the other results are positive focused.

Let's be fair, I'm making it up as I go. Thanqol deviated from what I expected with this last iteration. It's good, but I have less a handle on it.

[Anarion]

Okay, read over the whole thing. A few thoughts.

Edit: Added some lines for readability

The two playbooks look really good. They've got a united theme, and the different moves fit really well together with the actual job of that theme. I like them a lot. By far the most jarring thing to me was that the Guardian's main stat is laughter. If you're sticking with elements, I think that should be Magic. I think you went with laughter because it's the closest to AW's Weird stat, but as that class is described, all their moves actually make more sense to me with Sharp than with Weird and the class seems to be more intellectually focused.

-------------

The basic moves still seem not quite there. Honesty is obviously the core of the entire setting and I have nothing to add on it. I think loyalty 7-9 should have a negative. Like, instead of reducing your help, you start a new problem. Something like

Help Out
Roll +loyalty when you help someone out.
10+: You make a big contribution
7-9: you make a big contribution, but your actions trigger the emergence of a new problem.

Do Something Nice looks solid. I'm actually trying to think of failures around that one. You haven't gotten to MC moves yet, but I'm trying to figure out if the shape of failing a Do Something Nice roll is that you lose significant resources without making any real gain, or is it that you hurt or offend the pony that you're trying to help? Basically, does doing something nice require a sacrifice on your part, or does it rotate entirely around how your actions affect the target?

For Empathize, I'd add one more question: "what do you think will happen if you don't __"

I do think one of the options is off for Acting Under Pressure, but I don't know which way because I can't tell what you want with it. If you want it to be strictly a move used to do tasks and maybe get help for yourself, make it
-you inspire
-you can juggle
-you keep cool
-you do one thing way beyond expectations

If it's more of a fighting type move, or at least equivalent to acting under fire, I'd say something more like
-you can juggle
-you keep cool
-you startle/shock/scatter
-you get out cleanly

------------------

Logically, why does accepting a Responsibility give you the ability to assure others who are doubting you that you can handle it? It seems to me that if somepony thinks you're failing, taking on even more work would be the last thing in the world they'd want to see you doing. You'll just be stretched thinner and have even less time to dedicate to the task where they think you're failing.

------------------

As far as the Discorded moves, I think you have to offer experience for using them. Or some kind of mechanic that forces their use, like Darkest Self does. If there isn't some kind of forcing effect from the game, the majority of players will simply refuse to touch them. An alternative would be to make it so that use of the Discorded move is the only way to get rid of the Discord effect, and then if the player refuses to touch it, the MC (or other players) can simply dump more and more stuff on that character that really begs for the use of that forbidden move.

-----------------

Anyway, stepping back from the specifics for a second, I think that there's a basic uncertainty in the system between whether the focus in internal vs. external problems. The playbooks, the jobs, the responsibilities, and the types of problems all suggest a game where the focus is about building a life and perhaps a community in the face of scary external problems. I see the Guardian fighting huge monsters while the Farmer does her best to keep the community fed in the face of bad weather, blights, and invasive pests.

On the other hand, the basic moves are all about interpersonal conflict. The core conceit you've developed is that characters cannot, by default, articulate their need for help with their problems. The basic moves are all about ways for ponies to understand and support each other in the face of this one major failing, and the Discorded versions are all ways to get rid of your problems by making things worse for everypony else.

Obviously both kinds of conflicts can and should be present. But I think the question needs to be where the focus goes. Is fighting the Ursa major the thing that I need to be concerned about, and getting some help will make it easier on me? Or is it getting help that's the whole story, and once I have the right friends backing me up, the Ursa Major is just a footnote and maybe a chance for a bit of purple prose?

[Ezeze]

I think I'm getting the feeling that you're going for.

It's my first stab at this, so tell me honestly what you think of;

THE SHOPKEEPER
"My Cabbages!"

Core Responsibility: Business

Stats: +2 Generosity, +1, +1, 0, -1

Moves: All the basic moves, pick two Shopkeeper moves.

Savings: In the Black 5

Shopkeeper Special: When you date someone else, you may Give them a Gift
* once per season without spending the requisite point of cash.

*Refering to your "give someone a point of cash worth of gifts" move - it counts as doing something nice and hitting on a 10+

Moves:
The Backbone of the Community You may trade any number of points of Barter for an equivalent number of Holds.

Merchants' Guild When you try to make something big happen with money you get a +1 bonus without spending any additional Barter (to a maximum of 4).

Wise Investments You may spend 2 Barter to increase your savings by one. However you cannot benefit from your new, improved savings level until next season.

Hired Help You may offer another player Barter when you attempt to Ask Your Friends for Help. If you do carry 2 on that roll and, if successful, your Friend carries 1 on the next roll made to help you with that specific problem.

Carefully Chosen Gifts When you Help Someone Out you may roll +Generosity instead of +Loyalty

Accounts Payable, Accounts Receivable Under some condition (WIP :smalltongue:) you gain access to Do Something Nice and Take The Credit at the same time (ideally, this would allow the shopkeeper to Take the Credit only after they have Done Something Nice, but I can't figure out how to put that into place without making it horribly over powered....)




I tried to make sure The Shopkeeper had a ton of interesting, competing ways to spend Barter and also the ability to increase their Barter faster than anyone else (but not so fast that they dominate by second season).

Of course, this assumes any given game will last multiple seasons....

[Thanqol]

I like these moves much more now. Two things:
- You might consider adding a cost to Help Someone Out 7-9.
- I still don't quite get the last choice in Act Under Pressure.

Will take a look at the playbooks later.

I've got two thoughts on Help Someone Out:
- "But you are exposed to cost or risk", a la HX
- The implicit opportunity cost of setting up and using the move in the first place is sufficient.


Ah that makes some sense. I didn't think of targeting something negative with it, since the other results are positive focused.

Yeah, it's like, this is the move you use to face down a Chimera or make a lot of dresses before the deadline. They're the same category of problem in this system.


Okay, read over the whole thing. A few thoughts.

Edit: Added some lines for readability

The two playbooks look really good. They've got a united theme, and the different moves fit really well together with the actual job of that theme. I like them a lot. By far the most jarring thing to me was that the Guardian's main stat is laughter. If you're sticking with elements, I think that should be Magic. I think you went with laughter because it's the closest to AW's Weird stat, but as that class is described, all their moves actually make more sense to me with Sharp than with Weird and the class seems to be more intellectually focused.

Six stats is too many. Intellectual focus is not a thing. Laughter is the stat that is rolled when you're dealing with a scary situation, which most bad guy fights will come under. As you might notice, none of these classes is a perfect representation of any of the Mane 6 - the Guardian is half Twilight and half Pinkie Pie for example.


The basic moves still seem not quite there. Honesty is obviously the core of the entire setting and I have nothing to add on it. I think loyalty 7-9 should have a negative. Like, instead of reducing your help, you start a new problem. Something like

A new problem is too much. See my earlier thoughts.


Do Something Nice looks solid. I'm actually trying to think of failures around that one. You haven't gotten to MC moves yet, but I'm trying to figure out if the shape of failing a Do Something Nice roll is that you lose significant resources without making any real gain, or is it that you hurt or offend the pony that you're trying to help? Basically, does doing something nice require a sacrifice on your part, or does it rotate entirely around how your actions affect the target?

Failures around Do Something Nice are, like, art of the dress or the Cheese Sandwich episode. Primarily your idea of something nice doesn't mesh with their idea of something nice, or alternately you can't do it without paying a cost or something. I don't think DSN costs resources by default; I think that giving someone a Barter worth of gifts counts as hitting DSN with a 10+.


For Empathize, I'd add one more question: "what do you think will happen if you don't __"

Hmm. That's interesting. Confrontational and perhaps too self aware.


I do think one of the options is off for Acting Under Pressure, but I don't know which way because I can't tell what you want with it. If you want it to be strictly a move used to do tasks and maybe get help for yourself, make it

It's neither of those things. It's act under pressure. Maybe the pressure is a deadline, maybe it's a chimera.


Logically, why does accepting a Responsibility give you the ability to assure others who are doubting you that you can handle it? It seems to me that if somepony thinks you're failing, taking on even more work would be the last thing in the world they'd want to see you doing. You'll just be stretched thinner and have even less time to dedicate to the task where they think you're failing.

Again I'm pretty sure that those holds are going to be tied to the responsibility that generated them.


As far as the Discorded moves, I think you have to offer experience for using them. Or some kind of mechanic that forces their use, like Darkest Self does. If there isn't some kind of forcing effect from the game, the majority of players will simply refuse to touch them. An alternative would be to make it so that use of the Discorded move is the only way to get rid of the Discord effect, and then if the player refuses to touch it, the MC (or other players) can simply dump more and more stuff on that character that really begs for the use of that forbidden move.

Yeah that's what I'm thinking, r.e. the Highlight system.


Anyway, stepping back from the specifics for a second, I think that there's a basic uncertainty in the system between whether the focus in internal vs. external problems. The playbooks, the jobs, the responsibilities, and the types of problems all suggest a game where the focus is about building a life and perhaps a community in the face of scary external problems. I see the Guardian fighting huge monsters while the Farmer does her best to keep the community fed in the face of bad weather, blights, and invasive pests.

On the other hand, the basic moves are all about interpersonal conflict. The core conceit you've developed is that characters cannot, by default, articulate their need for help with their problems. The basic moves are all about ways for ponies to understand and support each other in the face of this one major failing, and the Discorded versions are all ways to get rid of your problems by making things worse for everypony else.

Obviously both kinds of conflicts can and should be present. But I think the question needs to be where the focus goes. Is fighting the Ursa major the thing that I need to be concerned about, and getting some help will make it easier on me? Or is it getting help that's the whole story, and once I have the right friends backing me up, the Ursa Major is just a footnote and maybe a chance for a bit of purple prose?

The focus is on getting the right friends to back you up. Once you have your friends behind you the problem gets resolved automatically. However, the problem is that your friends all have their own problems and dramas and there's not enough time to get everyone's problems sorted out so someone's always going to lose out. So the core question is always, 'Do I do something for my friends even if it costs me personally?'

[Anarion]

Six stats is too many. Intellectual focus is not a thing. Laughter is the stat that is rolled when you're dealing with a scary situation, which most bad guy fights will come under. As you might notice, none of these classes is a perfect representation of any of the Mane 6 - the Guardian is half Twilight and half Pinkie Pie for example.


Mm, I can see that. Maybe work on the fluff there a bit in terms of presentation. Those two playbooks were really solid, and the use of laughter there was the one thing that kind of knocked me out of what I was reading.



A new problem is too much. See my earlier thoughts.


What about, rather than just put them in a tight spot, start the seeds of a new problem? So you don't get an entire new problem just from a partial success, but the difficult situation or tight spot is something that opens the way for a new problem if you leave it alone too long.



Failures around Do Something Nice are, like, art of the dress or the Cheese Sandwich episode. Primarily your idea of something nice doesn't mesh with their idea of something nice, or alternately you can't do it without paying a cost or something. I don't think DSN costs resources by default; I think that giving someone a Barter worth of gifts counts as hitting DSN with a 10+.


Workable. I think perhaps that Do Something Nice could be required to cost a barter if you go too big. Like, if you throw a 30-pony party with full meals and desserts, maybe that's not possible without putting down at least a barter. Like, it's not that it should be a limit on the move, but if what you're doing in-world couldn't reasonably be done for free, you shouldn't be able to do it for free just because you say that you're trying to Do Something Nice.



Hmm. That's interesting. Confrontational and perhaps too self aware.


Hmm, I may have misphrased. I didn't think of it as confrontational necessarily, but rather as a way to get at what consequences the pony is worried about. It's not asking what's actually going to happen, but rather what they're afraid of happening if they don't manage to meet their own expectations.



It's neither of those things. It's act under pressure. Maybe the pressure is a deadline, maybe it's a chimera.


Okay. Question then. Let's say I use it to entertain and inspire my friends in a big public moment. What happens if I pick the surprise/shock/startle option? How do we make that positive in that context? Or alternately, let's say I don't pick that option with my crowd, what am I missing out on?



Again I'm pretty sure that those holds are going to be tied to the responsibility that generated them.


That still doesn't make a ton of sense to me. You've taken it on, they later come to you because they think you're failing and you spend the hold to reassure them. What does that look like IC? Is it just you saying "hey, don't worry about it, I got this thing" and they take your word for it because you have the hold?



Yeah that's what I'm thinking, r.e. the Highlight system.


Cool



The focus is on getting the right friends to back you up. Once you have your friends behind you the problem gets resolved automatically. However, the problem is that your friends all have their own problems and dramas and there's not enough time to get everyone's problems sorted out so someone's always going to lose out. So the core question is always, 'Do I do something for my friends even if it costs me personally?'

Okay, so, if I'm getting it right, the idea is my playbook moves show me where I'm strong and can afford to try stuff without friends, therefore I pick moves with the hope of opening up my time to offer it elsewhere?

[Thanqol]

My idea of the Shopkeeper is slightly different;

Introducing,

THE SHOPKEEPER

"My cabbages!"

CORE RESPONSIBILITY: Business

Stats: +2 Generosity, +1, +1, 0, -1

Moves: All the basic moves, pick two Shopkeeper moves

Savings: In the black 5

Shopkeeper Special: Once per season, you can Do Something Nice for the person you're dating and automatically succeed at a 10+.

Moves:

Luxury Goods: When you spend the season working for someone else, roll +generosity instead and if you are successful add 1 Barter in addition to the other rewards.

Product Placement: After you have successfully Done Something Nice for someone struggling with a Problem, you can roll to Claim The Credit for the outcome of that Problem if it is resolved within the same season.

Gathering Inspiration: When you spend the season travelling you can roll +Generosity rather than +Barter

Universal Appeal: You can Do Something Nice even for the most fearsome or antisocial monsters.

Market Research: When you want to know something about someone important (your call), roll +Generosity. 10+ ask three, 7-9 ask one.
* How are they doing? What's up with them?
* What or whom do they love best?
* Who do they know, like or trust?
* Who do they think is the most important person in this room?
* When should I next expect to see them?
* What are they saying about me behind my back?

Good Karma: Add the following option to the Do Something Nice list:
- They'll help you out whenever you next need it.

[Thanqol]

Workable. I think perhaps that Do Something Nice could be required to cost a barter if you go too big. Like, if you throw a 30-pony party with full meals and desserts, maybe that's not possible without putting down at least a barter. Like, it's not that it should be a limit on the move, but if what you're doing in-world couldn't reasonably be done for free, you shouldn't be able to do it for free just because you say that you're trying to Do Something Nice.

The consequence of that is that if you miss the roll then you've done f*cked up son and the MC's retaliatory Hard move will be all the Harder. The Barter isn't the big option, it's the safe option.


Okay. Question then. Let's say I use it to entertain and inspire my friends in a big public moment. What happens if I pick the surprise/shock/startle option? How do we make that positive in that context? Or alternately, let's say I don't pick that option with my crowd, what am I missing out on?

Perhaps you have a rival across the way from you who's mind you totally blow by how hardcore you look while taking down that Ursa Minor.


That still doesn't make a ton of sense to me. You've taken it on, they later come to you because they think you're failing and you spend the hold to reassure them. What does that look like IC? Is it just you saying "hey, don't worry about it, I got this thing" and they take your word for it because you have the hold?

This move needs full revisiting I think.


Okay, so, if I'm getting it right, the idea is my playbook moves show me where I'm strong and can afford to try stuff without friends, therefore I pick moves with the hope of opening up my time to offer it elsewhere?

Kind of, yeah?

[Anarion]

Kind of, yeah?

This might be weird, but the vibe I'm feeling from all this is sort of like playing a game of Agricola.

Edit: Also, the shopkeep looks really solid. I continue to feel like the playbooks are doing a really strong job on their theme and are looking exciting.

Capitalism, Ho!

[Amechra]

I wonder why the "sex moves" are based off dating and not being best friends with someone.

One of those feels more appropriate than the other.

[Thanqol]

I wonder why the "sex moves" are based off dating and not being best friends with someone.

One of those feels more appropriate than the other.

Because shipping (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CTBqP9JyCi8).

Also it's important to the Assistant in particular.

[Madcrafter]

I wonder why the "sex moves" are based off dating and not being best friends with someone.

One of those feels more appropriate than the other.

Because otherwise a lot people won't make their ponies date each other, leading to a chronic lack of shipping. And bad things happen when there is a lack of ships.

EDIT: Oyoo, ninjas

[SiuiS]

The two playbooks look really good. They've got a united theme, and the different moves fit really well together with the actual job of that theme. I like them a lot. By far the most jarring thing to me was that the Guardian's main stat is laughter. If you're sticking with elements, I think that should be Magic. I think you went with laughter because it's the closest to AW's Weird stat, but as that class is described, all their moves actually make more sense to me with Sharp than with Weird and the class seems to be more intellectually focused.

Giggles and ghosties.



For Empathize, I'd add one more question: "what do you think will happen if you don't __"

So, what fears or doubts plague you?



Logically, why does accepting a Responsibility give you the ability to assure others who are doubting you that you can handle it? It seems to me that if somepony thinks you're failing, taking on even more work would be the last thing in the world they'd want to see you doing. You'll just be stretched thinner and have even less time to dedicate to the task where they think you're failing.

No, man, think about it. It's brilliant.

You have three dots of resources. You have people heckling you. You can A) ignore hecklers and have three dots or B) shut them the hay up and be drained slightly and have only two dots.

It's not about "hey guys, I'm having trouble so I'm totally able to handle this!" It's "yeah, hehe, I got this, don't worry, don't need me no help" and having a harder time at cost of not dealing with social burdens.


Thanqol, consider letting the discarded moves be free but highlight not only the move but also reinforce a penalty (they already do, but for posterity). Like, you can take shortcuts and be pragmatic and efficient but nobody likes you. You have to balance beig right and being liked.

[Anarion]

So, what fears or doubts plague you?


Yeah that's a good phrasing of it.



No, man, think about it. It's brilliant.

You have three dots of resources. You have people heckling you. You can A) ignore hecklers and have three dots or B) shut them the hay up and be drained slightly and have only two dots.

It's not about "hey guys, I'm having trouble so I'm totally able to handle this!" It's "yeah, hehe, I got this, don't worry, don't need me no help" and having a harder time at cost of not dealing with social burdens.


It's specifically an NPC move though (unless I heavily misread it). You're not dictating to a player that you have it handled, that would be a failed honesty roll. You're dictating to the universe that it should leave you alone. Which I just can't wrap my mind around in terms of how that plays out in action.

There's something there though. I think it's trying to get at the distinction between showing the initiative vs. having something demanded of you. When one steps up and takes on a project, she get to own it, do it the way she wants. When somebody else forces a project on a person, that person is subject to the demands and the rules of the person giving the orders.

[SiuiS]

It's specifically an NPC move though (unless I heavily misread it). You're not dictating to a player that you have it handled, that would be a failed honesty roll. You're dictating to the universe that it should leave you alone. Which I just can't wrap my mind around in terms of how that plays out in action.

There's something there though. I think it's trying to get at the distinction between showing the initiative vs. having something demanded of you. When one steps up and takes on a project, she get to own it, do it the way she wants. When somebody else forces a project on a person, that person is subject to the demands and the rules of the person giving the orders.

I don't know what you mean by NPC move. My reading is that as a player, you can tak on responsibility and either A) get three dots and have people hound you or gain two dots and no hounding.

"But what about situations where nopony hounds you?"

Those by default give only two dots. The move itself creates the rule wherein versions free of outside heckling are own one dot. It is just phrased in a way that can be applied to other players too, if their interference is soppig you somehow.



That's missing though. So far, I'm not seeing anything that strains players between players at all. Nowhere in the game is there a reason to say "gee, I'm sorry Twi, but I promised RD I would help her, and I also have to buck all these apples." I mean, implicitly there's an unspoken and not explicit time limit to catastrophes, but that's all.

Maybe these +1 forwards can only be used on other pony's projects. That forces team work and bartering because it's the only way to get stuff done on your bad stats. You promise them a +1 forward from your stuff. Maybe you back out? That would be interesting. Maybe you can't because you get there and then roll poorly, suddenly getting consequences.

Thanqol?

[Anarion]

By NPC move, I meant that it's used on NPCs. You're not spending hold to tell other PCs how they feel about your Responsibility, you're spending it to dictate the general attitude of NPC ponies. I think at least.

[TheAmishPirate]

A sudden pre-bedtime thought; if Princess isn't working, what about something like a Matriarch/Patriarch? Not a pony in any official office, but one so familiar with the town that there isn't a soul they haven't shared a deep conversation with. The sort that can inspire shame with the slightest look, or beckon mortal enemies to the same table with a word. Theirs is a subtle, solid power, and this town would squabble itself to death without them.

I figure if this is supposed to be a small town setting, Princesses don't usually hang about such places.

[SiuiS]

By NPC move, I meant that it's used on NPCs. You're not spending hold to tell other PCs how they feel about your Responsibility, you're spending it to dictate the general attitude of NPC ponies. I think at least.

Hmm. Okay. I don't see why this strikes you as weird, then. Is it an idea that the DM doesn't have as much of a concrete stake in making the player's life miserable in X fashion?

[Thanqol]

^ Will think about this for a while before responding ^

Introducing,

The Assistant

"I'd never leave my friends hanging!"

CORE RESPONSIBILITY: Personal

Stats: +2 Loyalty, +1, +1, 0, -1

Moves: All the basic moves, get Devotion and one other Assistant move.

Savings: Treading Water 3

Assistant Special: When you date someone they count as an additional Devotion.

Moves:

Devotion: Choose one of the other player characters to be the subject of your Devotion. You gain +1 to any roll that has to do with your Devoted.

The Crush: When you have a crush on someone then they count as an additional Devotion. You can have as many crushes as you want but they have to be fairly important to you in order to continue mattering. The Crush does not have to be romantic.

Love And Hate: You may always use both the Loyalty moves on your Devoted.

Shoulder To Cry On: When your Devoted tells you about their problems, roll +Loyalty to help them:
10+: They erase one of their Problems and you choose one
- Mark XP
- Take 1 forwards
- They transfer one of their Responsibilities to you.

7-9: They choose 1
- They erase one of their problems
- They transfer one of their Responsibilities to you.

Last Resort: Each Season you always count as having stocked additional supplies and provisions in addition to anything else you did.

Guardian Angel: Whenever your Devoted is in any kind of physical danger you are always there to save them.

[Ezeze]

Product Placement: After you have successfully Done Something Nice for someone struggling with a Problem, you can roll to Claim The Credit for the outcome of that Problem if it is resolved within the same season.
This is pretty much exactly what I was going for with the Accounts Payable, Accounts Receivable power.




I don't have a full The Mayor penned out, and it's almost 2am so I'm not going to do it tonight, but I'm thinking she should have something like;

Special: In The Public Eye. Whenever anyone get credit for solving a problem, you get half as much credit; this does not subtract from the amount of credit the other person gets. Whenever anyone is blamed for a catastrophe, you get an equivalent amount of blame; this does not subtract from the amount of blame the other person receives.

[Thanqol]

This is pretty much exactly what I was going for with the Accounts Payable, Accounts Receivable power.


I don't have a full The Mayor penned out, and it's almost 2am so I'm not going to do it tonight, but I'm thinking she should have something like;

Special: In The Public Eye. Whenever anyone get credit for solving a problem, you get half as much credit; this does not subtract from the amount of credit the other person gets. Whenever anyone is blamed for a catastrophe, you get an equivalent amount of blame; this does not subtract from the amount of blame the other person receives.

I would like to do the Playbooks myself. I've got pretty clear ideas on each of them, and on what makes a good Playbook. I'm much more interested in feedback and analysis of the mechanics. Any thoughts on how Responsibilities are handled mechanically would be especially welcome because that's the big topic of contention right now.

[Thanqol]

Introducing,

The Entertainer

"I am the GREAT and POWERFUL TRIXIE!!"

CORE RESPONSIBILITY: Stage

Stats: +2 Laughter, +1, +1, 0, -1

Moves: All the basic moves, choose 2 Entertainer Moves

Savings: In The Black 5

Entertainer Special: When you date someone else, if they don't turn up to one of your performances take -1 ongoing until you next talk to them.

Moves:

Get The Band Together!: You can link up any number of other people in music regardless of their individual talents, rehearsals, sheet music or any of that nonsense.

Light That Shines Within: When you're going all out while performing to a crowd, roll +laughter. On a 10+ hold 3, 7-9 hold 1. Spend your hold one for one to make the crowd:
- Burst into uninhibited emotional displays
- Focus on the music to the exclusion of all else
- Have the greatest time of their lives
- Forget what they were talking about just before the show started
- Put aside their differences temporarily while performing a task

If your Laughter is reversed you may also choose from this list:
- Scam them out of their money
- Boo and heckle your competitors

Bass Cannon: You have access to some serious business piece of entertainment hardware, like a one man band, party cannon, Sonic Rainboom, etc. You detail.

Upstage!: You are immune to any attempt to Take The Credit or otherwise overshadow your contribution.

Reputation: When you meet someone for the first time, if you decide they've heard of you roll +laughter.
10+: You decide what they've heard of you and you take +1 forwards with them
7-9: You decide what they've heard about you.
On a miss the MC decides what they've heard about you.

Exit, Stage Left: When a great magician has to leave the scene she does so with style. Roll +laughter:
10+: You're gone, with style.
7-9: You're gone, but not without embarrassing yourself somehow

[Anarion]

Playbook thoughts later.


Hmm. Okay. I don't see why this strikes you as weird, then. Is it an idea that the DM doesn't have as much of a concrete stake in making the player's life miserable in X fashion?

The idea in a *world game is that everything you do is reflected IC and when you do the IC thing, you have to roll the dice (or spend hold or whatever). Most of the moves that give hold represent that hold as the fruits of an interaction. You read a person and ask questions because you had/are having a conversation with them that gives you insight into what they're thinking. You can roll the move before talking, but you can't spend your hold without the conversation.

My issue with responsibilities is that I'm finding it challenging to wrap my brain around what the hold represents. As written, it makes a connection between taking responsibility and your ability to fail or reassure others about that responsibility. That's not really how it works, though. Usually you take a responsibility and people leave you alone. If they're coming to you with concerns, you can't effectively reassure them because you took on the responsibility before they were concerned. You instead rely on their trust of you as a person and how reliable they believe you to be.

Now, I do think there's a distinction between tasks that you volunteer for and tasks that are forced upon you. So something like the following might work if we want to avoid changing the structure of the move.

Responsibility
When you volunteer for a task, hold 3. If it's forced upon you, hold 1. You may spend your hold 1 for 1 to
-reassure someone that your way of handling the problem is the right one
-ask someone for additional resources needed for the responsibility
-Stay in charge after a setback

The idea being that when you choose to undertake something, you're really the one in charge, you get to handle the project the way you want because you stepped up to do it and everyone consented to that. When you're given an order, you're not really the one in charge. You're handling it, but somebody else is the one really pulling the strings and they can give you a pretty short leash if they don't like what you're doing.

[Ezeze]

I would like to do the Playbooks myself. I've got pretty clear ideas on each of them, and on what makes a good Playbook. I'm much more interested in feedback and analysis of the mechanics. Any thoughts on how Responsibilities are handled mechanically would be especially welcome because that's the big topic of contention right now.

Understood.



... I think perhaps a better word for "Hold" - at least, as I understand it - would be "Reputation" or even "Influence," but I'll use "Hold" for now to prevent confusion.


That in mind, I think it might be better to not give out Hold/Reputation when a task is accepted, but rather when it is completed. I propose the following;

In addition to belonging to one of eight groups, all Responsibilities are one of two types; either Projects or Commitments. Projects and Commitments are different in that a Project is short-term, completable, and easy to both take on and discharge.

For example, a Project might be; fixing a bridge, repelling an invasion or planning a party. At the heart of every Project is the Problem "(Project) is not Finished Yet." You cannot solve this Problem until all of the other Problems associated with it have been resolved. Once a Project is resolved, the Pony who resolved it is rewarded (Some combination of Hold, Experience, increased Savings Level, assured help in the future, or something else depending on player choice or GM choice or even what kind of project it was).

A Commitment might be; taking care of a younger sibling, running a shop, being a good student, being a good friend or protecting the town from magic. Unlike Projects, Commitments need not necessarily have a Problem associated with them at any given time, but when a Commitment does create a Problem it's automatically the Problem of whoever made that Commitment. Every Pony must have at least one Commitment related to their Playbook at all times. Ponies are rewarded for their Commitments at the end of every Season, with penalties that subtract from that reward for every unresolved problem.

Problems are created any time anypony fails a roll (though it won't necessarily be a problem for the pony who failed the roll), and also according to GM discretion.

The idea is here is that Responsibilities have predictable rewards, but unpredictable problems - meaning taking on a Commitment is always a gamble, and the system is subtly rigged to encourage PCs to over-extend themselves. Notice, too, that you don't get rewards of any kind for solving Problems. Nopony but you cares about how problematic a Responsibility is, they only care whether or not you can come through on your end. Under this system Catastrophe timers would have to be tied to Problems and not Responsibilities, but I think that makes more sense anyways...



Under this system, Useful Lies could be changed from giving someone else your Responsibility to giving someone else your Problem.



Any time anypony fails a roll, the GM should do one of the following;
Create a new Problem in regards to a Project.
Create a new Problem in regards to a Commitment.
Create a new Project.
Make an existing Problem worse.

[Anarion]

That's a pretty harsh set of roll failures Ezeze. To compare, in AW, roll failures can involve the PC getting killed or taking serious harm, but in other contexts, a roll failure is only an announcement of something off in the distance, an opportunity to ask a probing question, or even a chance for an NPC to join up with one of the PCs and ask for help.

I think every roll having such huge potential consequences might be discouraging to the players. You ultimately want them to roll and have the successes and partial successes escalate into interesting drama, not make rolling so scary that they never want to do it.

[Ezeze]

That's a pretty harsh set of roll failures Ezeze. To compare, in AW, roll failures can involve the PC getting killed or taking serious harm, but in other contexts, a roll failure is only an announcement of something off in the distance, an opportunity to ask a probing question, or even a chance for an NPC to join up with one of the PCs and ask for help.

I think every roll having such huge potential consequences might be discouraging to the players. You ultimately want them to roll and have the successes and partial successes escalate into interesting drama, not make rolling so scary that they never want to do it.

I see your point! The idea there, though, was to tie the generation of problems to something other than GM discretion, but neither put in a ton of extra numbers and tables to keep track of nor made it so that you could set your clock by when problems happened; in essence to give the occurrence of problems the appearance of randomness while still giving the GM guidelines within which she can work.

In a related vein, I notice that while the general idea of the game seems to be that there simply isn't enough time to deal with everyone's problems, so PCs must jockey amongst themselves to get their problems attended to so they can collect the ensuant rewards. We're putting problems and rewards in place, and we have time limits in the form of Catastrophe timers, but we don't have anything in place dictating a minimum amount of time for solving problems to take. Standardizing the number of workable hours in a day across games would go a long way to keeping difficulties consistent, which helps with power balancing.

In addition to making sure there is room for PCs to have fun, we also have to think about these things from the perspective of handing over the reigns to GMs who haven't participated in these discussions :smallwink:

[SiuiS]

Playbook thoughts later.



The idea in a *world game is that everything you do is reflected IC and when you do the IC thing, you have to roll the dice (or spend hold or whatever). Most of the moves that give hold represent that hold as the fruits of an interaction. You read a person and ask questions because you had/are having a conversation with them that gives you insight into what they're thinking. You can roll the move before talking, but you can't spend your hold without the conversation.

My issue with responsibilities is that I'm finding it challenging to wrap my brain around what the hold represents. As written, it makes a connection between taking responsibility and your ability to fail or reassure others about that responsibility. That's not really how it works, though. Usually you take a responsibility and people leave you alone. If they're coming to you with concerns, you can't effectively reassure them because you took on the responsibility before they were concerned. You instead rely on their trust of you as a person and how reliable they believe you to be.

I think you're taking it too linearly, myself. Sticking with the hold mechanic because it's familiar and is already used elsewhere in the game, this is just "take a responsibility. You can either get two points of hold, or three but people are heckling you". The sum total is the same whether you view it as gaining three points and maybe spendig one, or choosing between two or three points.

That nonlinear equivalency is what makes this work for me.


Also, apologies Ezeze. I don't want to ignore you or anything but you are just talking about the rules at a more concrete level than I am and I have nothing to contribute :(

[Anarion]

I think you're taking it too linearly, myself. Sticking with the hold mechanic because it's familiar and is already used elsewhere in the game, this is just "take a responsibility. You can either get two points of hold, or three but people are heckling you". The sum total is the same whether you view it as gaining three points and maybe spendig one, or choosing between two or three points.

That nonlinear equivalency is what makes this work for me.


Hold is an abstract concept, but it's used in places where it matches with intuitive action. Leadership hold on the Hardholder is "I'm being a hardass to force my men to do stuff." You spend it and you roleplay shouting out commands or some scene showing your grit and endurance. When the Battlebabe gets hold to freeze up NPCs, it's specifically an ice cold staredown.

The abstract, even if you can make it work as a mechanic, doesn't really work for me if you can't explain what it is you're doing to spend the hold.

At any rate, we've probably gone back and forth on this enough at this point for Thanqol to at least get a good sense of the issue.

[SiuiS]

m
The abstract, even if you can make it work as a mechanic, doesn't really work for me if you can't explain what it is you're doing to spend the hold.

You're spendig time and energy assuring neighsayers you could have used to do actual problem solving. I thought I opened with that last night but maybe I said it poorly?

I'm doing the thing where I can grok the entirety but explain the sequence poorly.

[Tiki Snakes]

Only been skimming and barely familiar with the game anyway, but I do think that there's something odd with the savings thing. I mean, not only is the idea of having a health bar in a game about ponies doing slice-of-life episode stuff a little weird, but it specifically being cash savings?

I'm not sure where that comes from, conceptually. I'm not sure show ponies even have cash savings any more than they have an economy. Surely running out of money or other resource related reserves simply imposes a conditiony problemy thing? Something about being broke? Maybe if unsolved it resolves itself by taking your stuff, given this is a game in name at least that is about Infastructure, this seems appropriate at least to what little understanding of the system I have.

I might have missed this being resolved or abandoned already, admittedly.

[DeafnotDumb]

Exit, Stage Left: When a great magician has to leave the scene she does so with style. Roll +laughter:
10+: You're gone, and if you left under bad circumstances some of that is washed away by the impressiveness of your exit.
7-9: You're gone, but you don't leave with any particular style.

Small thing, but I feel the 10+ option should have a bonus for occasions when you're leaving the scene, but there are no bad circumstances you need to escape. Perhaps just an explicit 'You're gone with style' would suffice.

[Thanqol]

Gonna think about the Responsibility thing more today. I like Anarion's adjusted wording.


Only been skimming and barely familiar with the game anyway, but I do think that there's something odd with the savings thing. I mean, not only is the idea of having a health bar in a game about ponies doing slice-of-life episode stuff a little weird, but it specifically being cash savings?

I'm not sure where that comes from, conceptually. I'm not sure show ponies even have cash savings any more than they have an economy. Surely running out of money or other resource related reserves simply imposes a conditiony problemy thing? Something about being broke? Maybe if unsolved it resolves itself by taking your stuff, given this is a game in name at least that is about Infastructure, this seems appropriate at least to what little understanding of the system I have.

I might have missed this being resolved or abandoned already, admittedly.

It's because it's a game about little things.

Making your health bar be your savings is worthwhile I think because it makes the biggest problem in your life the looming threat of being evicted - and that's the consequence of savings 0, the bank reclaims your house. Then you're on your own, on the streets, and have until the next Season to find someone to take you in or you have to leave town. And if two people do move in together that instantly becomes a new Responsibility for both of them and starts and keeps generating Problems until the bankrupt one gets back on their feet.

It's like, what if instead of getting magical princess castle'd, the resolution to season 4 was everyone coming together to build a new house for Twilight? The inclusion of savings really creates such a strong set of incentives and communicates so much tone I couldn't do without it even though the execution still needs work.

[Ezeze]

Only been skimming and barely familiar with the game anyway, but I do think that there's something odd with the savings thing. I mean, not only is the idea of having a health bar in a game about ponies doing slice-of-life episode stuff a little weird, but it specifically being cash savings?

I'm not sure where that comes from, conceptually. I'm not sure show ponies even have cash savings any more than they have an economy. Surely running out of money or other resource related reserves simply imposes a conditiony problemy thing? Something about being broke? Maybe if unsolved it resolves itself by taking your stuff, given this is a game in name at least that is about Infastructure, this seems appropriate at least to what little understanding of the system I have.

I might have missed this being resolved or abandoned already, admittedly.

I think this is less an issue of the idea in question and more an issue of what we're calling that idea.

It's not "Savings" - it's "Infrastructure." It's not a cash reserve, it's things already in place that make life easier, which is represented as generating "Barter" every season. That Barter can then be reinvested to generate more Infrastructure, or it can be expended to generate Hold/Influence/Whatever-we-end-up-calling-that.


In Apocalypse World/Monster Hearts the worst thing that can happen to your character is that she can die horribly. We don't necessarily want that on the table in a MLP game. Instead, the worst thing that can happen is everything you've worked for is broken and gone and you have to start over.

With that in mind, it might be a better idea to at least start everyone off with the same amount of Savings/Infrastructure....

[Thanqol]

Small thing, but I feel the 10+ option should have a bonus for occasions when you're leaving the scene, but there are no bad circumstances you need to escape. Perhaps just an explicit 'You're gone with style' would suffice.

Good point that is more elegant.


In Apocalypse World/Monster Hearts the worst thing that can happen to your character is that she can die horribly. We don't necessarily want that on the table in a MLP game. Instead, the worst thing that can happen is everything you've worked for is broken and gone and you have to start over.

With that in mind, it might be a better idea to at least start everyone off with the same amount of Savings/Infrastructure....

That's exactly it.

I've also been strongly considering putting everyone at savings 5; different savings levels are cute but they're not necessary I think.

[Anarion]

I've also been strongly considering putting everyone at savings 5; different savings levels are cute but they're not necessary I think.

Hmm. I can make the argument both ways on that one. On one hand, having everyone start with about the same savings is elegant and lets the players all play the game on the same footing. Nobody is more important or more safe than anybody else, and that makes sure things stay interesting and that the classes will balance with one another.

On the other hand, The Guardian, in particular, has this great feel to me by starting at savings 2. It's like, if there's a Guardian in the game, they open the game in deep trouble. Their custom moves aren't very good at improving their material position, they're on the verge of bankruptcy, and if all the other players do nothing, the Guardian is going to have an awful time. Only, here's the thing. If the Guardian has an awful time, EVERYPONY has an awful time. If I'm the merchant, no matter how much I care about my business, I need to invest in the Guardian because it prevents my stuff from being trampled by giant monsters, magical corruption, or mind control headsquids.

[Thanqol]

Hmm. I can make the argument both ways on that one. On one hand, having everyone start with about the same savings is elegant and lets the players all play the game on the same footing. Nobody is more important or more safe than anybody else, and that makes sure things stay interesting and that the classes will balance with one another.

On the other hand, The Guardian, in particular, has this great feel to me by starting at savings 2. It's like, if there's a Guardian in the game, they open the game in deep trouble. Their custom moves aren't very good at improving their material position, they're on the verge of bankruptcy, and if all the other players do nothing, the Guardian is going to have an awful time. Only, here's the thing. If the Guardian has an awful time, EVERYPONY has an awful time. If I'm the merchant, no matter how much I care about my business, I need to invest in the Guardian because it prevents my stuff from being trampled by giant monsters, magical corruption, or mind control headsquids.

Yeah pretty much the only reason for the divergent savings thing is the Guardian for that exact reason. Maybe it might just be her.

[Ezeze]

Only, here's the thing. If the Guardian has an awful time, EVERYPONY has an awful time.

If this is what you're going for then you should tie Savings Level more heavily into how efficient you can be, because as it stands as long as the Guardian has a Savings Level of 1 she is still doing everything that everypony needs her to do. So as a Merchant I am invested in keeping that Guardian at at least a Savings Level of 1, and it doesn't affect me at all if she is doing any better than that.

[Thanqol]

If this is what you're going for then you should tie Savings Level more heavily into how efficient you can be, because as it stands as long as the Guardian has a Savings Level of 1 she is still doing everything that everypony needs her to do. So as a Merchant I am invested in keeping that Guardian at at least a Savings Level of 1, and it doesn't affect me at all if she is doing any better than that.

That's the other thing. I earlier considered savings periodically generating Barter but that floods the economy. Maybe attaching brief descriptors to each of the levels or something. Or make it possible to trade Savings levels for things. Also, why is it the Shopkeeper's job to financially sustain her friend?

Are Savings transferrable? If not that could also make it more difficult to deal with. Hmm.

Or maybe increase the number of things that can be purchased with savings; i.e. big public works projects like paved roads or a fire brigade and stuff. The Guardian and the Shopkeeper will have very different priorities and one might want public gardens while the other wants a circle of protective runestones and they debate this in council meetings. Might add that as a new Seasonal move.

[Anarion]

One imagines that part of the tension is that the Shopkeeper et al want to do just enough to have the Guardian stick around, but no more. But if the Guardian figures out that she's being kept on subsistence living, she could always withhold Her own help unless she gets support from others.

All of which will depend on the exact nature of what one can do with savings.

[SiuiS]

That's the other thing. I earlier considered savings periodically generating Barter but that floods the economy. Maybe attaching brief descriptors to each of the levels or something. Or make it possible to trade Savings levels for things. Also, why is it the Shopkeeper's job to financially sustain her friend?

Are Savings transferrable? If not that could also make it more difficult to deal with. Hmm.

Or maybe increase the number of things that can be purchased with savings; i.e. big public works projects like paved roads or a fire brigade and stuff. The Guardian and the Shopkeeper will have very different priorities and one might want public gardens while the other wants a circle of protective runestones and they debate this in council meetings. Might add that as a new Seasonal move.

Savings should be transferable but there should be either a limit or some sort of backlash for liquidation. If you can't occasionally pay for others to get things, then money doesn't function right.

Basically, Anarion's thing.

[Thanqol]

I'm having a bit of difficulty thinking of interesting things to do with the Kindness stat, especially R.E. the Sheriff. This is mostly me, I think, I don't much like Fluttershy and think that most of her episodes centre around her not being Fluttershy. She's kind of merged with the Mentally Advanced Fluttershy in my head.

Does anyone have any words or thoughts on how to connect the ideas of community defence, kindness, and the ideas of infrastructure?

I'm still thinking about how to sort out the economy but I'm a bit short on sit down and meditate time right now so I'm more focusing on short, sharp goals rather than fundamental expressions or underpinnings and such.

[TheAmishPirate]

I'm having a bit of difficulty thinking of interesting things to do with the Kindness stat, especially R.E. the Sheriff. This is mostly me, I think, I don't much like Fluttershy and think that most of her episodes centre around her not being Fluttershy. She's kind of merged with the Mentally Advanced Fluttershy in my head.

Does anyone have any words or thoughts on how to connect the ideas of community defence, kindness, and the ideas of infrastructure?

I'm still thinking about how to sort out the economy but I'm a bit short on sit down and meditate time right now so I'm more focusing on short, sharp goals rather than fundamental expressions or underpinnings and such.

Kindness is about knowing the right amount to push.

Kindness tells a sheriff when to let a kid go with a warning, and when he needs to cool his hooves in a holding cell.

Kindness tells a sheriff when a hostile force can be negotiated with, and when he needs to draw a line in the sand.

Kindness tells a sheriff when a suspect is hiding something, or when they're simply too rattled to think straight.

Kindness tells a sheriff how to balance defensive buildings with respecting community/private land.

Kindness tells a sheriff what folks really are after when they come to him with conflicting projects and threats of lawsuit.

Kindness tells a sheriff this town'd fall apart if he ever stopped caring even one iota less about these ponies.

[SiuiS]

I'm having a bit of difficulty thinking of interesting things to do with the Kindness stat, especially R.E. the Sheriff. This is mostly me, I think, I don't much like Fluttershy and think that most of her episodes centre around her not being Fluttershy. She's kind of merged with the Mentally Advanced Fluttershy in my head.

Does anyone have any words or thoughts on how to connect the ideas of community defence, kindness, and the ideas of infrastructure?

I'm still thinking about how to sort out the economy but I'm a bit short on sit down and meditate time right now so I'm more focusing on short, sharp goals rather than fundamental expressions or underpinnings and such.

The eyebrow especially. (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/member.php?60170-Brazen-Shield)

I don't think community defense is a good way of thinking. That's modern military policing style. Think Andy Griffith. Kindness is not being Barney fife.


Kindness is about knowing the right amount to push.

Kindness tells a sheriff when to let a kid go with a warning, and when he needs to cool his hooves in a holding cell.

Kindness tells a sheriff when a hostile force can be negotiated with, and when he needs to draw a line in the sand.

Kindness tells a sheriff when a suspect is hiding something, or when they're simply too rattled to think straight.

Kindness tells a sheriff how to balance defensive buildings with respecting community/private land.

Kindness tells a sheriff what folks really are after when they come to him with conflicting projects and threats of lawsuit.

Kindness tells a sheriff this town'd fall apart if he ever stopped caring even one iota less about these ponies.

Kindness is empathy. So there should be some way to mitigate or avoid consequences by using kindness on the situation instead? Kindness should create compromises – "I will let you off with only a ticket, don't do it again" instead of an arrest?

Makes sense. Resolve a problem without cost. That problem comes back later based on the nature of the problem.

[Ezeze]

Resolve a problem without cost. That problem comes back later based on the nature of the problem.

I like this, but nailing it down better requires that we delve into the actual mechanics of resolving Problems (capital 'P') :smallwink:

[TheAmishPirate]

I don't think community defense is a good way of thinking. That's modern military policing style. Think Andy Griffith. Kindness is not being Barney fife.

Andy Griffith was exactly the example I was thinking of. :smalltongue:


Kindness is empathy. So there should be some way to mitigate or avoid consequences by using kindness on the situation instead? Kindness should create compromises – "I will let you off with only a ticket, don't do it again" instead of an arrest?

Makes sense. Resolve a problem without cost. That problem comes back later based on the nature of the problem.

Basically. But there are times when Kindness is simply putting your hoof down and doing what needs to be done, no compromise at all. Telling somebody what they need to hear, giving somebody the care they need, or giving somebody necessary punishment.

Kindness, I think, is more of an attitude of the heart that shines through in action. It's an unconditional care for someone's well-being that colors all interactions.

[Anarion]

I don't think kindness has to mitigate consequences. Look at the episode with the Breezies: kindness there was to be stern. A law enforcement type with kindness is one that the community trusts. Who can rely on her authority and understand the wrongdoing of others, selecting a punishment that will cement the lesson and help repair the wrong that was committed.

[SiuiS]

I like this, but nailing it down better requires that we delve into the actual mechanics of resolving Problems (capital 'P') :smallwink:

That's true.


Andy Griffith was exactly the example I was thinking of. :smalltongue:


/) !


Basically. But there are times when Kindness is simply putting your hoof down and doing what needs to be done, no compromise at all. Telling somebody what they need to hear, giving somebody the care they need, or giving somebody necessary punishment.

Kindness, I think, is more of an attitude of the heart that shines through in action. It's an unconditional care for someone's well-being that colors all interactions.

Kindness is valuing others enough to put them before yourself. Friendship is never having to pull your punches.


I don't think kindness has to mitigate consequences. Look at the episode with the Breezies: kindness there was to be stern. A law enforcement type with kindness is one that the community trusts. Who can rely on her authority and understand the wrongdoing of others, selecting a punishment that will cement the lesson and help repair the wrong that was committed.

Hmm. I meant it solely in the context of a sheriff dispensing law with kindness. Putting it generally like that and aye, it's silly.

I don't want to mitigate consequences, though. I want kindness to Defer problems. To fix them temporarily. Because Kindness as we usually see it only goes so far. A kind sheriff can break up a mob with an appeal, but that's only going to disperse it, not root out and quash the cause.

I don't know how well that works; I don't have a feel for goals or competency. Is the lesson that these virtues always win? Then givig kindness a temporary win is undercutting that. So is saying that you need other methods to finalize a win. How competent are we? Both "y'all go home, stop fuss in," and actually solving things with a gentle but form hoof are kindness, one is just more successful.

[Thanqol]

In place of the Sheriff specific manifestation any ideas for a Kindness-focused playbook would be appreciated. Conceptual stuff and common linking themes between episodes are ideal.

E: Ah, I think I've got it. Merge Sheriff with Doctor, Firefighter, and various other disaster relief figures. Make it about helping those in the most need. I think that's what I'm after here.

[SiuiS]

In place of the Sheriff specific manifestation any ideas for a Kindness-focused playbook would be appreciated. Conceptual stuff and common linking themes between episodes are ideal.

E: Ah, I think I've got it. Merge Sheriff with Doctor, Firefighter, and various other disaster relief figures. Make it about helping those in the most need. I think that's what I'm after here.

Makes sense. "kind Sheriff" plays an awful lot like "mayor"

[Thanqol]

Makes sense. "kind Sheriff" plays an awful lot like "mayor"

Mayor is a misleading title too which might need changing. It's meant to be, like, Rainbow Dash commanding the weather team or Twilight co-ordinating Winter Wrap Up, or whoever sets up the Running of the Leaves. Sort of like the gruntwork behind the big community projects and while Mayor is appropriate for that it implies a title that might not be accurate.

[SiuiS]

Mayor is a misleading title too which might need changing. It's meant to be, like, Rainbow Dash commanding the weather team or Twilight co-ordinating Winter Wrap Up, or whoever sets up the Running of the Leaves. Sort of like the gruntwork behind the big community projects and while Mayor is appropriate for that it implies a title that might not be accurate.

"Coordinator". Or whatever Sparkle's title was In winter wrap up.

[Anarion]

Thanqol, go watch the music video for "Hands" by Jewel (one of Tessen's major themes). I think that's exactly what you're looking for from kindness.

Edit: oh and if you're looking for a team leader title, try any of the following on for size
Community organizer
Logistician
Supervisor
Counselor (or counselpony)
Director
Leader (if you want to be totally generic)

[Thanqol]

Introducing,

THE VOLUNTEER

"Anybody could do what I do. Nobody does, though."

CORE RESPONSIBILITY: Defence

Stats: +2 Kindness, +1, +1, 0, -1

Moves: All the basic moves, pick two Volunteer moves.

Savings: Treading Water 3

Volunteer Special: When you're dating someone you can always use both of your Kindness moves on them at any distance.

Moves:

Rescue 911: Whenever there is a disaster in the town you count as a team of fifteen for the purposes of rescue and containment.

Lockdown: You can find a way to immobilise or contain theoretically anything - though not necessarily without some major construction.

Animal Whisperer: You can converse, interact and use Moves on animals as though they were people.

Political Protest: When you spend the Season protesting against unjust political or economic policies (you decide) roll +Kindness:
10+: You can replace one piece of local Infrastructure with something that better suits you.
7-9: You can block progress or use of any piece of Infrastructure you disagree with.

Graduate: When you treat a serious injury or illness, you can do it but, roll +Kindness:
10+: Pick one
7-9: Pick three

- The treatment will be expensive
- The treatment will be time consuming
- The treatment will have strange or magical side effects
- The treatment will require something unusual
- The treatment will require the patient to change their behaviour in a way they won't like

Danger Sense: Whenever a Problem is created that poses a risk to life or limb roll +Kindness:
10+: Both
7-9: Choose one:
- You sense where it'll come from.
- You sense what it is.

[TheAmishPirate]

/) !

(/

Out of the many things that I'll always thank my dad for, one of them is for introducing me to the Andy Griffith show. :smalltongue:


In place of the Sheriff specific manifestation any ideas for a Kindness-focused playbook would be appreciated. Conceptual stuff and common linking themes between episodes are ideal.

E: Ah, I think I've got it. Merge Sheriff with Doctor, Firefighter, and various other disaster relief figures. Make it about helping those in the most need. I think that's what I'm after here.

Given that I can see Andy volunteering for his position, rather than getting appointed or working up towards the office, I think that's a good angle to take.


Mayor is a misleading title too which might need changing. It's meant to be, like, Rainbow Dash commanding the weather team or Twilight co-ordinating Winter Wrap Up, or whoever sets up the Running of the Leaves. Sort of like the gruntwork behind the big community projects and while Mayor is appropriate for that it implies a title that might not be accurate.

I'm not actually sure it does. When I read "Mayor", I read a person who, whether by political clout or actual ability, has wrangled their way into a position of authority. The Mayor figure is concerned with their team/town/project not only being successful, but being the most successful. It communicates a certain level of pride and inherent competition, even if nobody else is playing the game.

To go back to the Andy Griffith example, the Mayor there spends most of his time doing things to increase Mayberry's reuptation, even though there's no other town they're competing with. It's a matter of pride in ones town and the desire to make it the best it can be.


Introducing,

THE VOLUNTEER

On first glance, this playbook reads very different from the ones thus far. There's only two options for rolling here, and neither are really proactive. One is a Seasonal move in response to another character's actions, and another is a roll in response to a Problem being generated. The rest of the moves are simply, "You have the ability to do X." Compared to the other playbooks, there's almost no action for the Volunteer to initiate. Everything is either responsive, or opens up additional capabilities.

I don't know if that's what you were going for, but that's what it's reading to me.


Bonus thought: It occurs to me that Problems are, at their core, a thing to prevent Responsibilities from being met. The Farmer could buck all these apples, if only they weren't down a worker. The Shopkeeper could make wicked bank, but their shipments aren't coming in on time. The Volunteer could defend the town, but the fire station is in disrepair. A PC could watch over these foals, if only they weren't fanatically looking for their cutie marks. If a Responsibility is totally free of Problems, then it just takes an investment of time or money or RP to meet it. If it's a non-core Responsibility, then the Responsibility may be resolved entirely. If it's a core Responsibility, then it's met for the Season. If Problems aren't met in a timely fashion, or if too many of them pile up, then Responsibilities can easily turn into Catastrophes. Mechanically, I'm thinking of something similar to Betrayal at House on the Hill, where the Catastrophe roll gets harder and harder to make the more Problems are still unresolved.

Bonus bonus thought: This also means that Problems can be a mystery to the PCs. When they go to resolve a Responsibility, the MC dictates a failure state that suggests, "Hey, you've still got crap to take care of before this is an auto-resolve." Not necessarily Catastrophe, but something that shows the Responsibility has yet to be met. There may be something for giving Honesty-focused players a way to get a better read on remaining Problems than they would otherwise have.

[Ezeze]

Mechanically, I'm thinking of something similar to Betrayal at House on the Hill, where the Catastrophe roll gets harder and harder to make the more Problems are still unresolved.

Bonus bonus thought: This also means that Problems can be a mystery to the PCs. When they go to resolve a Responsibility, the MC dictates a failure state that suggests, "Hey, you've still got crap to take care of before this is an auto-resolve." Not necessarily Catastrophe, but something that shows the Responsibility has yet to be met. There may be something for giving Honesty-focused players a way to get a better read on remaining Problems than they would otherwise have.

Oooh, I love this idea! I was worried about the "Catastrophe Timer" because I thought having a count-down attached to every problem might be a lot of numbers to keep track of, and this neatly solves both that and the problem of "this problem has 2 hours left until it goes catastrophic, can we handle it in that time period?"

We could roll a number of d6s equal to the number of players every time a new problem was generated and, if the roll was beneath the total number of unresolved Problems, that new Problem would be Catastrophic! - this leaves room for every player to have one ongoing problem without there being any possibility for Catastrophes, but of course Ponies want to take on lots of Commitments and lots of Projects because that is how they get Hold/Barter/whatever else they might want.

[TheAmishPirate]

Oooh, I love this idea! I was worried about the "Catastrophe Timer" because I thought having a count-down attached to every problem might be a lot of numbers to keep track of, and this neatly solves both that and the problem of "this problem has 2 hours left until it goes catastrophic, can we handle it in that time period?"

Aye! This method drastically reduces the amount of bookkeeping require to handle Responsibilities and Problems. All the MC has to do is keep track of what Problems go with which Responsibility, and then roll appropriately at a given time. No keeping track of fifteen different countdown clocks, just a few rolls here and there.


We could roll a number of d6s equal to the number of players every time a new problem was generated and, if the roll was beneath the total number of unresolved Problems, that new Problem would be Catastrophic! - this leaves room for every player to have one ongoing problem without there being any possibility for Catastrophes, but of course Ponies want to take on lots of Commitments and lots of Projects because that is how they get Hold/Barter/whatever else they might want.

Something like that, though probably sticking more with AW's style of "roll 2d6 and add modifiers." In this case, you could do something like "roll 2d6 - # of unresolved problems attached to this Responsibility." 10+ means nothing bad happens, everything is fine and dandy, 9-7 means that you get a new Problem, 6 and below means you change playbook to Mayor, because you are now the legally elected Mayor of Castrophetown.

One problem I do see with this method is that it still leaves the possibility of getting royally screwed on a Responsibility that only has one lingering Problem, even if you spent the whole Season taking care of 4 other Problems. And in terms of design elegance, it's a little weird that a Responsibility with no Problems isn't a roll with no penalty, but rather isn't rolled at all. The whole thing could be a lot cleaner, really, but I like the idea behind it.

[Ezeze]

Something like that, though probably sticking more with AW's style of "roll 2d6 and add modifiers." In this case, you could do something like "roll 2d6 - # of unresolved problems attached to this Responsibility." 10+ means nothing bad happens, everything is fine and dandy, 9-7 means that you get a new Problem, 6 and below means you change playbook to Mayor, because you are now the legally elected Mayor of Castrophetown.

This might result in too many Catastrophes, considering even with 0 problems you have a 41% chance to roll below a 6 on 2d6. Also, I'm not sure we want to attach the Catastrophe Roll to specific Responsibilities - the opposite, actually; I think the game would be improved if problems building up in one area could and frequently did lead to more problems bleeding out into other Responsibilities.

I think central to this discussion as well is the question of how we are going to handle Discord Moves. Maybe instead of Problems leading to more Problems and a higher chance of a Catastrophe, we could have problems lead to more Discord, which in turn leads to more Problems and a higher chance of a Catastrophe?

[Anarion]

I feel a vague sense of discomfort at the thought of rolling for the occurrence of problems. I think those should be MC moves and happen in a manner that involves player choice. They're the consequences and the things that need to be dealt with, they themselves shouldn't be rolls.

[TheAmishPirate]

This might result in too many Catastrophes, considering even with 0 problems you have a 41% chance to roll below a 6 on 2d6. Also, I'm not sure we want to attach the Catastrophe Roll to specific Responsibilities - the opposite, actually; I think the game would be improved if problems building up in one area could and frequently did lead to more problems bleeding out into other Responsibilities.

I think central to this discussion as well is the question of how we are going to handle Discord Moves. Maybe instead of Problems leading to more Problems and a higher chance of a Catastrophe, we could have problems lead to more Discord, which in turn leads to more Problems and a higher chance of a Catastrophe?

Look back at the list of Core Responsibilities. Currently in the design, Responsibilities can either be resolved positively, or auto-resolve by going Catastrophe. Responsibilities have both Problems and a Catastrophe outcome. This design doesn't mean that Responsibilities can't ever bleed Problems into other Responsibilities; there may be an MC move that says "among the things you can do when a Catastrophe hits, add a Problem to another Responsibility."

I do agree that the current mechanics I proposed are wonky and wouldn't work, but I'm arguing more for the spirit of the thing.


I feel a vague sense of discomfort at the thought of rolling for the occurrence of problems. I think those should be MC moves and happen in a manner that involves player choice. They're the consequences and the things that need to be dealt with, they themselves shouldn't be rolls.

Problems aren't exclusively generated via rolls. MC moves will add the lion's share of Problems to a Responsibility. What a system like this does - in which a bad Responsibility/Problem/Catastrophe roll adds more Problems - is it highlights what happens when Problems are allowed to pile up; things continue to get worse until they're dealt with. If the Shopkeeper doesn't do something about his supply route Problem, then he's going to have another Problem when his stocks run low. Player choice comes in on which Problems they deal with and which ones they leave for later.

Plus, if the number of Problems is related to the chance of activating a Catastrophe, then it naturally prevents a Responsibility from stagnating. Unless the PCs intervene, more Problems are generated until things spiral down to a Catastrophe.

[Ezeze]

I feel a vague sense of discomfort at the thought of rolling for the occurrence of problems. I think those should be MC moves and happen in a manner that involves player choice. They're the consequences and the things that need to be dealt with, they themselves shouldn't be rolls.

I was operating under the assumption that the MC would be doing all of these rolls. Maybe rolling for Problems is a questionable mechanic, but I feel we do need to provide some sort of solid guidelines for the frequency at which Problems should occur, or else risk MCs getting into the mindset that the Ponies should at least have a chance to solve all of their problems, and that's not the case. Setting a minimum number of problems at any given time might accomplish this, but then it ties generating new problems - a bad thing - to the solving of Problems - which is supposed to be the goal.

I do think rolling to see if a specific problem is a Catastrophe is the right way to go, though. In addition to being laborious to keep track of, I don't think anyone - MC or Pony - should have the kind of correct, reliable information (even OOC) regarding when the next Catastrophe is coming that Catastrophe Timers would give.


I think central to this discussion as well is the question of how we are going to handle Discord Moves.

I know I'm quoting myself here, but I really think that nailing this down will make the discussion of how to generate and solve Problems much clearer.

Also, can Ponies generate Problems for one another? Accidentally? On purpose? Is there a crunch benefit for having done so?

[Anarion]

Sorry I'm not being more helpful, but something about this whole line of problem generation discussion feels off to me. The system should naturally encourage the players to undertake responsibilities and to generate problems without needing to roll or force their generation, I think. The problem, I think, is that we're all really vague right now on the responsibility/problem/catastrophe system as a whole, so you guys are just throwing dice mechanics into the void.

Here's a comparison. Imagine if Apocalypse World asked you to roll dice to see whether your character participates in a violent encounter. Not for how they do, but for being involved with it at all. That's what this feels like to me. And that makes no sense because in AW the players choose when and where to engage in violence, it's fundamental to the setting.

[Madcrafter]

I'm inclined to agree with Anarion. Maybe we should wait until Thanqol is done with the playbooks then and gives responsibilities/problems/catastrophes something more concrete.

[Ezeze]

Sorry I'm not being more helpful, but something about this whole line of problem generation discussion feels off to me. The system should naturally encourage the players to undertake responsibilities and to generate problems without needing to roll or force their generation, I think. The problem, I think, is that we're all really vague right now on the responsibility/problem/catastrophe system as a whole, so you guys are just throwing dice mechanics into the void.

Here's a comparison. Imagine if Apocalypse World asked you to roll dice to see whether your character participates in a violent encounter. Not for how they do, but for being involved with it at all. That's what this feels like to me. And that makes no sense because in AW the players choose when and where to engage in violence, it's fundamental to the setting.

Time for some background on EZ; For the past nine months two good friends and I have been designing and selling board games. After expenses we've made less than minimum wage, but it's been fun and entrepreneurial endeavors look good on a resume so whatever :smallwink: But I'll admit it might be coloring my thinking regarding how thoroughly this game should be automated - after all, very few board games have GMs.

Reading what Anarion said just now... It strikes me that maybe it should be entirely up to the MC when a Catastrophe should happen. In fact, maybe it being out of their hands means they won't be able to foreshadow it like they'd be able to if it had been building up in the background for a while. Maybe the entire Problem mechanic is unnecessary, and we should allow Ponies to pick responsibilities and leave it at that, allowing narration to decide what is and what isn't a problem and when it is or isn't solved. The end result is a much more rules-light system, and maybe rules-light is ideal for a game where the entire focus is on small, day-to-day things.

[TheAmishPirate]

Sorry I'm not being more helpful, but something about this whole line of problem generation discussion feels off to me. The system should naturally encourage the players to undertake responsibilities and to generate problems without needing to roll or force their generation, I think. The problem, I think, is that we're all really vague right now on the responsibility/problem/catastrophe system as a whole, so you guys are just throwing dice mechanics into the void.

Then let me be a bit more clear and direct about what I'm envisioning, and leave hard mechanics out of the question entirely:

A Responsibility represents something that you must do. A critical part of the game is fulfilling Responsibilities and reaping the benefits. The MC assigns Responsibilities from a player's Core Responsibility, and players can take on additional Responsibilities over the course of play.

Responsibilities could be fulfilled easily were it not for Problems. Problems are things that prevent you from fulfilling a Responsibility. A Responsibility can have multiple Problems, all Problems must be resolved before a Responsibility can be fulfilled, and a player may not always know all the Problems associated with a Responsibility. There may be minor benefits to resolving a Problem, but much less than fulfilling a Responsibility. The MC often assigns Problems, but other players can transfer or generate Problems as well.

If a Responsibility is left neglected and builds up too many Problems, the Responsibility will undergo Catastrophe. When that happens, the Responsibility is considered fulfilled, but instead of benefits the players get only negatives. A Catastrophe is not a Problem, but rather a failure state of a Responsibility.

Here's one example of what those might look like, as stolen from Thanqol's list of Core Responsibilities:


BUSINESS RESPONSIBILITIES
Playbook: Shopkeeper
Type: Responsibilities to do with running, maintaining and expanding your business

Examples: Produce dresses, bake goods, open new shops, pay taxes, etc
Problems: Needy or shifty clients, bureaucratic oversight, price hikes, late deliveries
Rewards: Connections, fame, large cash payouts, small cash payouts, gratitude
Catastrophes: Savings hit, lose connections, publicly embarrassed, disappoint someone

More of these can be found on page 3.


Here's a comparison. Imagine if Apocalypse World asked you to roll dice to see whether your character participates in a violent encounter. Not for how they do, but for being involved with it at all. That's what this feels like to me. And that makes no sense because in AW the players choose when and where to engage in violence, it's fundamental to the setting.

They do have that; it's the Hardholder's Wealth move. At the start of the session, the Hardholder rolls. Depending on the result, there's either surplus, or some of their Wants activate. The Wants will dictate what the players have to deal with that session, which could be a violent encounter.

That's more what I had in mind; not necessarily rolling to see what the players have to specifically deal with, but rolling to see if the players have an additional Problem to deal with. The MC still gets to decide what the nature of that Problem is.

For example; Applejack has the Responsibility to buck all these apples, but her Problem is that she's down a worker. If she can't resolve that Problem, then on the next Responsibility roll the MC may be able to add "sleep deprived and overworked" as another Problem. Whether that's a MC move, or a MC move that triggers on a certain roll result, or something else entirely is up for later. In my head, Problems should be able to generate more Problems if they aren't addressed, and a Responsibility with a heaping load of Problems is prime for Catastrophe.

[Anarion]

For example; Applejack has the Responsibility to buck all these apples, but her Problem is that she's down a worker. If she can't resolve that Problem, then on the next Responsibility roll the MC may be able to add "sleep deprived and overworked" as another Problem. Whether that's a MC move, or a MC move that triggers on a certain roll result, or something else entirely is up for later. In my head, Problems should be able to generate more Problems if they aren't addressed, and a Responsibility with a heaping load of Problems is prime for Catastrophe.

That's a front, pretty much straight up. We could rewrite the AW rules if you want, but as described, it's a front and is handled entirely by the front rules.

Ignore: tick up front counter, situation worsens.
Try to deal with and succeed on actions: problems resolved
Try to deal with and fail on actions: problem worsens, specific consequences occur appropriate to attempted and failed action.

I mean, here's a spoiler free example from Iselsi


Plague

Fundamental scarcity: Decay

Threats:
Warlord (prophet)
Undisclosed Landscape
Affliction: disease

Agenda: If nothing is done about the plague, the region will be severely depopulated and the disease could spread spread across the borders.

Stakes (and these are kinda a WIP as you've been raising issues): Will a whole town throw itself into the sea? Will the Pale Lady keep the plague from passing the borders? Will [S]Raitonsomeone find a god who can treat the disease?

Countdown:
0: no deaths
3 pm: single or minor deaths
6 pm: small number of deaths
9 pm: quarantine impossible, widespread disease (this is presently where you are).
10 pm: [REDACTED]
11 pm: [REDACTED]
12 pm: [REDACTED] (but take a wild guess)


And here's how you'd do it for Applejack's applebucking


I can buck all these apples!

Responsibility: Business

Dark future/Catastrophe: If the apples aren't bucked, they'll rot on the trees. If they're left even longer, they'll attract a swarm of fruit bats that will make it impossible to grow any new apples until they're taken care of. Many ponies will go hungry.

Stakes: Will Applejack manage to ask for help? Will [NPC pony] succeed in treating Big Macintosh? Will the road get repaired in time to get new farming equipment before the harvest? [add one more question maybe]

Countdown:
0: Apples are growing well, bucking on schedule
3 pm: minor setbacks
6 pm: additional minor setbacks
9 pm: unresolved setbacks build up to make the task suddenly overwhelming. There just aren't enough hours in the day!
10 pm: harvest impossible without help
11 pm: some apples rot even with help
12 pm: fruit bats arrive, most apples rot or are devoured.

You'd also write up the fruit bats, and some other stuff (maybe the road problem) as specific threats.

Edit: Also, the important thing for this type of game is that Applejack's attempts to address the problem aren't her making hard moves, it's her trying to balance time with her friends and asking for help. So if she asks for and receives help, the problems are easily solved and the apples are harvested. This might be an ongoing responsibility that will come up again, or maybe it's a one off and they set up harvesting teams in the future. If she asks for help but totally fails, she has to go try on her own and doesn't do as well, clock might tick up slowly or stay frozen where it is, but not improve. If she abandons this entirely to go help Twilight Sparkle fight off a giant monster that's threatening the whole town, the clock ticks upwards towards catastrophe.

[TheAmishPirate]

I don't think that's right. I need more time to think on it, but I know one major problem with fronts is one of volume. In Ruins of Iselsi, we have 3-5 fronts at the moment. In this system, it'd be 3-5 fronts per player. And each player would need to keep track of their Responsibilities and their associated Problems, because there are hard moves associated with both of those. Think about how much messy bookkeeping would be needed to facilitate that.

Even if it ends up a rewrite of fronts, I think the system necessitates it.

[Anarion]

I don't think that's right. I need more time to think on it, but I know one major problem with fronts is one of volume. In Ruins of Iselsi, we have 3-5 fronts at the moment. In this system, it'd be 3-5 fronts per player. And each player would need to keep track of their Responsibilities and their associated Problems, because there are hard moves associated with both of those. Think about how much messy bookkeeping would be needed to facilitate that.

Even if it ends up a rewrite of fronts, I think the system necessitates it.

While 3-5 full fronts per player would be excessive, the system is, so far, explicitly designed to be about juggling responsibilities, with a constant conflict between handling one's own affairs and helping out your friends. We can simplify in a variety of ways, but the ultimate point is that there are going to be 2-3 keywords per player. If Applejack has to handle (1) applebucking (2) caring for her sister, and (3) throwing the family reunion, while also (4) helping her friends with all their responsibilities, there's going to be some amount of system juggling no matter what you do. The only alternative is to not make each of those 4 things a distinct thing at all. We can make the juggling easier (countdown clocks might be done away with in favor of a small number of problems, for example), but we can't get away from the fact that the whole point of the game is for the player to need to balance all 4 of those things, while each other player does something similar.

[Thanqol]

The point about the Volunteer's moves not being up to snuff was well made so they've been re-done to be a little more active and player-driven.

Will go through the above debate in the evening. By all means keep discussing.

[Anarion]

The point about the Volunteer's moves not being up to snuff was well made so they've been re-done to be a little more active and player-driven.


I like the team of 15 move. It's very vague, but I think players and MCs will both appreciate that if you take that move, you're looking to have some disasters happen and to be in the spotlight in those moments. However, I would make an observation: actual disaster relief, if it became a move, would probably be "do something nice" or "act under pressure." One thing to consider might be to have the Volunteer class have one move that allows them to use kindness in place of laughter for "act under pressure."



Will go through the above debate in the evening. By all means keep discussing.

Very helpful. I was actually getting near to the point that I was going to disengage from discussion so as not to overwhelm.

[TheAmishPirate]

The point about the Volunteer's moves not being up to snuff was well made so they've been re-done to be a little more active and player-driven.

Will go through the above debate in the evening. By all means keep discussing.

I like the new moves much more.


While 3-5 full fronts per player would be excessive, the system is, so far, explicitly designed to be about juggling responsibilities, with a constant conflict between handling one's own affairs and helping out your friends. We can simplify in a variety of ways, but the ultimate point is that there are going to be 2-3 keywords per player. If Applejack has to handle (1) applebucking (2) caring for her sister, and (3) throwing the family reunion, while also (4) helping her friends with all their responsibilities, there's going to be some amount of system juggling no matter what you do. The only alternative is to not make each of those 4 things a distinct thing at all. We can make the juggling easier (countdown clocks might be done away with in favor of a small number of problems, for example), but we can't get away from the fact that the whole point of the game is for the player to need to balance all 4 of those things, while each other player does something similar.

Aye. It seems like we agree on this point. Lots of responsibilities, some of them coming and going, juggling abounds.

My point is that if we know this to be true, then why go with a system that requires a lot of bookkeeping? To compare the two for a moment:

-A front requires a clock tracker, consequences that happens at each tick, a list of Problems, and a Catastrophe.

-A Responsibility requires a list of Problems, and a Catastrophe.

In terms of material needed, the latter seems much easier to keep track of.

[Anarion]

Aye. It seems like we agree on this point. Lots of responsibilities, some of them coming and going, juggling abounds.

My point is that if we know this to be true, then why go with a system that requires a lot of bookkeeping? To compare the two for a moment:

-A front requires a clock tracker, consequences that happens at each tick, a list of Problems, and a Catastrophe.

-A Responsibility requires a list of Problems, and a Catastrophe.

In terms of material needed, the latter seems much easier to keep track of.

I mostly agree with this. The issue, I was raising earlier was with the random generation of problems, or with having a bunch of different systems that generate problems that all need to be kept track of in their own right. Even if fronts are too complex to use all out, I think their basic model of Big Issue-->generates little issues is precisely written to handle what we're trying to do with responsibilities and problems. Anything where you have to make moves or roll random generation is an attempt to reinvent the wheel and should only be undertaken if you think there's something fundamentally wrong with the model we already have.

[TheAmishPirate]

I mostly agree with this. The issue, I was raising earlier was with the random generation of problems, or with having a bunch of different systems that generate problems that all need to be kept track of in their own right. Even if fronts are too complex to use all out, I think their basic model of Big Issue-->generates little issues is precisely written to handle what we're trying to do with responsibilities and problems. Anything where you have to make moves or roll random generation is an attempt to reinvent the wheel and should only be undertaken if you think there's something fundamentally wrong with the model we already have.

Just to recap - and so as to forestall misunderstanding - the system that I had in mind went something like this, which was to be in addition to whatever moves the MC has to generate Problems:


At a designated time, a check of some sort is made using the number of unresolved Problems. The best outcome is that nothing happens. The okay outcome is that the MC gets to make a new Problem. The worst outcome is Catastrophe. The more Problems there are, the worse the result will be.

They key thing I foresaw us getting out of this idea is uncertainty. A player doesn't have a concrete idea of when a Responsibility will go Catastrophe. Instead, they know a probable range of Problems that will cause a Responsibility to turn into a Catastrophe. There is a greater element of risk-taking involved, as there's a certain range where it's sorta kinda safe to leave a Responsibility unattended. It's the tantalizing yellow light; do you speed up and try to shore up a few other Responsibilities, or do you play it safe and campaign hard for yourself? Plus, I envision players debating what the appropriate level of risk-taking is and remembering all too well when they were goaded into a poor gamble. It's one thing to put aside your differences and work towards a common good, it's quite another to put aside past grievances and do the same.

As I type this out, I've realized that Problem generation doesn't actually have to be involved in this. The uncertainty happens whether or not a Problem is generated. Problem generation doesn't reinforce uncertainty, it reinforces the idea that Responsibilities will spiral out of control if left alone. However, this can be done without a roll, simply by an MC taking appropriate moves when a Responsibility is left unattended. There doesn't need to be a specific roll-mechanic to reinforce that. So in that sense, I think I agree with you there, and what I'm really arguing for is for the Catastrophe trigger I described above.

[Thanqol]

Looks like a resolution is being reached on this topic (my thoughts later), so something I'd like to see discussed next:

Savings. How does it work, what can it be spent on, how rarely it should be in threat etc. Right now everyone has a Seasonal Barter generation move and three playbooks (including the Mayor) will have the ability to generate small amounts of additional Barter. A point of Barter is worth a 10+ success on Do Something Nice. Is this too low an economy? What costs money? How much? Words on this would help me structure my thoughts.

[Madcrafter]

Did you ever decide on the distinction between barter/savings? Were they going to be different things and/or act as a health bar?

I read through the Dark Age documents, and I quite like the feel of it. I could see a savings harm track working along the same lines.

[Thanqol]

Did you ever decide on the distinction between barter/savings? Were they going to be different things and/or act as a health bar?

I read through the Dark Age documents, and I quite like the feel of it. I could see a savings harm track working along the same lines.

I intend them to be different things. A lot of seasonal moves, including 'increase savings', consume barter to roll and I think that's a nice dynamic and stops me having to figure out if repairing your house is Kindness or Honesty.

The Dark Age thing is the main inspiration as to how Savings will work but I don't know how that'll work yet.

[Anarion]

Just to recap - and so as to forestall misunderstanding - the system that I had in mind went something like this, which was to be in addition to whatever moves the MC has to generate Problems:



They key thing I foresaw us getting out of this idea is uncertainty. A player doesn't have a concrete idea of when a Responsibility will go Catastrophe. Instead, they know a probable range of Problems that will cause a Responsibility to turn into a Catastrophe. There is a greater element of risk-taking involved, as there's a certain range where it's sorta kinda safe to leave a Responsibility unattended. It's the tantalizing yellow light; do you speed up and try to shore up a few other Responsibilities, or do you play it safe and campaign hard for yourself? Plus, I envision players debating what the appropriate level of risk-taking is and remembering all too well when they were goaded into a poor gamble. It's one thing to put aside your differences and work towards a common good, it's quite another to put aside past grievances and do the same.

As I type this out, I've realized that Problem generation doesn't actually have to be involved in this. The uncertainty happens whether or not a Problem is generated. Problem generation doesn't reinforce uncertainty, it reinforces the idea that Responsibilities will spiral out of control if left alone. However, this can be done without a roll, simply by an MC taking appropriate moves when a Responsibility is left unattended. There doesn't need to be a specific roll-mechanic to reinforce that. So in that sense, I think I agree with you there, and what I'm really arguing for is for the Catastrophe trigger I described above.

I think leaving the problem generation part out makes it appeal a lot more to me. That was muddling it. I can accept the idea of uncertainty, but I don't know if we need to have it.

Stepping back really far, have you read Mark Rosewater's article on randomness in games? (http://archive.wizards.com/Magic/magazine/article.aspx?x=mtg/daily/mm/37) Admittedly, this is a different sort of beast, but nevertheless, I'm not sure what uncertainy is gaining for us here. Perhaps some unexpected interesting plot developments. But also at the risk of a player feeling like they're not in control of their own character, or that they're not rewarded for their successes and their smart choices.

One of the AW maxims is to always give the players what they've earned, and uncertainty in catastrophe runs against that, I think.


Looks like a resolution is being reached on this topic (my thoughts later), so something I'd like to see discussed next:

Savings. How does it work, what can it be spent on, how rarely it should be in threat etc. Right now everyone has a Seasonal Barter generation move and three playbooks (including the Mayor) will have the ability to generate small amounts of additional Barter. A point of Barter is worth a 10+ success on Do Something Nice. Is this too low an economy? What costs money? How much? Words on this would help me structure my thoughts.

Are we using the AW barter moves at all? Or were you thinking of only Doing Something Nice? That matters a lot, I think. There aren't big guns or crazy vehicles in pony, but there are rare magical items, spells, and special services that one could easily drop quite a bit of cash on for either selfish or selfless purposes.

We also have seasonal infrastructure. Could one drop savings mid-season to make a rush job happen? Like, let's say you really need that new storehouse for the farm, or the special obelisk to hold back a monster. Could you drop major cash to make it happen right the hell now?

[SiuiS]

I intend them to be different things. A lot of seasonal moves, including 'increase savings', consume barter to roll and I think that's a nice dynamic and stops me having to figure out if repairing your house is Kindness or Honesty.

The Dark Age thing is the main inspiration as to how Savings will work but I don't know how that'll work yet.

You'll have to give those of us without Dark Age more info, honey.

[Thanqol]

I've made no decisions on Barter at all right now, Anarion. Help sculpt it.


You'll have to give those of us without Dark Age more info, honey.

Dark Age is free (http://lumpley.com/index.php/awda).

[SiuiS]

http://i1229.photobucket.com/albums/ee468/WizardPony/F7E2902E-08F7-44DC-8334-14574E5591BB.png
http://i1229.photobucket.com/albums/ee468/WizardPony/C9CA65C5-BC2B-4992-9D8A-9536529A76BB.png


I'm gonna have to lie. I hate having to lie. :smallannoyed:.

[Anarion]

I've made no decisions on Barter at all right now, Anarion. Help sculpt it.


I'm working on it. Consider those general questions to the group. How would everyone feel if your savings was your health but you could spend "health" for an immediate, powerful effect once a season? It's your one use trump card, but one with a vulnerability of hurting yourself: thus usable only to avoid greater harm.

On barter, rather than savings, I think that one area where players are going to be inventive is finding stuff to buy. One might as well break out the D&D magic item compendium and start throwing things in the shopping cart. Lightning in a bottle? Did you want the Cloudsdale brand, or the import from Las Pegasus? None of it with specific game rule effect, of course, but if somebody has a problem later and they've got a spare bolt of lightning sitting around, they might just find a use for it.


http://i1229.photobucket.com/albums/ee468/WizardPony/F7E2902E-08F7-44DC-8334-14574E5591BB.png
http://i1229.photobucket.com/albums/ee468/WizardPony/C9CA65C5-BC2B-4992-9D8A-9536529A76BB.png


I'm gonna have to lie. I hate having to lie. :smallannoyed:.

It's a minor lie.

[Madcrafter]

I'm working on it. Consider those general questions to the group. How would everyone feel if your savings was your health but you could spend "health" for an immediate, powerful effect once a season? It's your one use trump card, but one with a vulnerability of hurting yourself: thus usable only to avoid greater harm.I like it. I don't know if you need to limit it, the risk of permanent reduction might be enough (if it does work as Dark Age).

Another thing to think about is if you can liquidate savings into barter. I'd be inclined to think so just because it makes sense, but then we need to make sure it's not disruptive to the economy.

[SiuiS]

I'm working on it. Consider those general questions to the group. How would everyone feel if your savings was your health but you could spend "health" for an immediate, powerful effect once a season? It's your one use trump card, but one with a vulnerability of hurting yourself: thus usable only to avoid greater harm.

That's called living paycheck to paycheck and isn't so far from my lifestyle as it is from yours, love. XD



It's a minor lie.

That's like choosing the "lesser" evil.

I just had Braz do it. <__<

[Thanqol]

I don't think Fronts/Problems need a randomising element. The MC's caprice is a sufficient randomiser as far as the players should be concerned. I really like the basic structure of Fronts and look forwards to breaking down common small town problems into discrete entities and categories with Impulses and Moves, and for writing the MC moves in general.

When the Principles are written they'll have something like 'never shy from disaster'. It's okay for the town to burn down from time to time, everyone to take a savings hit, and focus on a rebuilding arc next.

I'm becoming less convinced that there needs to be a specific move for taking on responsibilities. I think that was like the original Loyalty move, an icon of a game design that didn't materialise the way I guessed it would.

*

I want Savings to be distinct from Barter otherwise people will perform the mental arithmetic: I have 9 barter so therefore I have exactly 3 savings. I do want there to be a separation between loose cash and backup fund.

Currently one of my ideas for what to do with Savings is have it be the only thing spendable to make big projects happen. So a new waterfront or a train station might cost a certain amount Savings. Maybe a new Seasonal move like, 'Grand Project, roll +Savings spent'. Have the Mayor playbook interact with this move some more. This'd be nice because it'd make Savings be something that really does represent that long period of scrupulous savings and final massive investment.

[SiuiS]

Make savings work like stress from fate, overlap not stack. Like, if you have 2 savings and you get a +2 savings, you have 2 savings. You need to get a 3 savings boost to move to the next one.

Tiered costs sort of. Make the arithmetic shaky. Make saving for savings eventually be a labor of love, rather than a given?

Oh but then you've got a game which likely involves playing fast and loose with cheap, low level savings and no actual saving up. So you'd need incentives somewhere...

[Anarion]

I want Savings to be distinct from Barter otherwise people will perform the mental arithmetic: I have 9 barter so therefore I have exactly 3 savings. I do want there to be a separation between loose cash and backup fund.

Currently one of my ideas for what to do with Savings is have it be the only thing spendable to make big projects happen. So a new waterfront or a train station might cost a certain amount Savings. Maybe a new Seasonal move like, 'Grand Project, roll +Savings spent'. Have the Mayor playbook interact with this move some more. This'd be nice because it'd make Savings be something that really does represent that long period of scrupulous savings and final massive investment.

A thought. Similar to your suggestion in Iselsi that we have currency be Imperial Favor, rather than some quantity of jade or something, perhaps the two systems here can be made more distinct by pulling back from pure money. One possibility might be barter for the mid-season purchases. Barter represents Bits, but also goods on hand and possibly brief services you can perform in lieu of paying. Then, you could have something like "Standing" or "Goodwill." One could purchase community standing, so the wealthy merchant who brings in tons of imports and invests heavily in the community might have lots of the stat that was formerly savings whereas the Guardian that nobody ever sees in action might still have very little. But by calling it "Standing," you also put emphasis on the need not just for money but for the support of the community. Ponies build your infrastructure and not somebody else's because you command their respect and they pick you over anybody else.

The rest would pretty much stay the same. If you're making everypony work really hard for you, you're essentially spending your Standing and you'll need to do right by them (with either your money or your efforts) to earn it back.

[Thanqol]

Introducing,

THE MAYOR

CORE RESPONSIBILITY: Civic

Stats: +2 Honesty, +1, +1, 0, -1

Moves: All the basic moves, pick two Mayor moves

Savings: In the black 5

Mayor Special: When you date someone, if they ever fail one of their Responsibilities you take -1 forward.

Moves:

Council Summons: When you call a town meeting, declare who you want to have present (including 'everyone (http://youtu.be/74BzSTQCl_c)') and roll +Honesty:
10+: Everyone shows up
7-9: About three quarters of everyone shows up

Tax Code: When anyone spends Barter, roll with a bonus equal to the Barter spent:
10+: You gain one Barter
7-9: You gain one Barter and they take -1 on their roll

Community Construction: Whenever anyone Builds Infrastructure or Works On Their Home, mark one circle towards any project for free, including one of your own.

Herding: When you co-ordinate people towards a goal, roll +Honesty. 10+ hold 3, 7-9 hold 1. Spend your Hold to:

- Convince everyone to work together for the duration of the project
- Cut down the time taken for the project
- Inspire someone to reach outside themselves to help with the project
- Make the end result of particular quality
- Cut down on the financial cost of the project
- Convince someone who wouldn't normally help to pitch in to the project

Civic Pride: Once per Season you can reward someone else with a medal, trophy or other honour. They take +1 to any one stat of your choice until the end of the Season.

Realpolitick: When a major project is in danger of failing, you gain access to both Honesty moves.

[Anarion]

No lawmaking power for the mayor? :smalltongue:

[Ezeze]

I'm curious as to what logic you're using to determine whether to reward or penalize specific books for dating other ponies.

How come The Mayor and Entertainer get only bad things while the Volunteer and Shopkeeper get only good things? :smallconfused:

[Madcrafter]

Tax Code: When anyone spends Barter, roll with a bonus equal to the Barter spent:
10+: You gain one Barter
7-9: You gain one Barter and they take -1 on their rollIt seems like the mayor would get a ludicrous amount of money with this, depending on how barter is going to work and what one can get with it. And there is the very real possibility of constantly screwing others with 7-9s, which may very well make people less likely to take those actions, leading to a bit of a downwards spiral. Will there be anything someone can spend barter on that does not require a roll?


Community Construction: Whenever anyone Builds Infrastructure or Works On Their Home, mark one circle towards any project for free, including one of your own.

Civic Pride: Once per Season you can reward someone else with a medal, trophy or other honour. They take +1 to any one stat of your choice until the end of the Season.These seasonal things might be not very interesting choices, depending on the pace of seasons passing (mostly a concern for PbP) (I am assuming Builds Infrastructure and Works... are seasonal things). Also may want to put a cap (+2 or +3) on Civic Pride.


Herding: When you co-ordinate people towards a goal, roll +Honesty. 10+ hold 3, 7-9 hold 1. Spend your Hold to:

- Convince everyone to work together for the duration of the project
- Cut down the time taken for the project
- Inspire someone to reach outside themselves to help with the project
- Make the end result of particular quality
- Cut down on the financial cost of the project
- Convince someone who wouldn't normally help to pitch in to the projectI think this one has a few too many options. You could maybe consolidate a few? ex. "Cut down the time or cost of the project". Since they're all positive things, you could make it hold 2/1 instead.

[TheAmishPirate]

With all that's going on in my head, I nearly forgot about this thread. :smallredface:

Since the only remaining point in the Responsibility/Problem/Catastrophe discussion is Catastrophe triggers, I'll have more words to say in defense of my idea later.

I can throw in some Barter/Savings thoughts right now. I do like the idea of Barter being your walking around, "How do I resolve this problem quickly" money. It's the funds you dip into when there's a thing you need to resolve a Problem, or get something small done. Furthermore, it's an amount so insignificant compared to Savings that you can't really make an equivalency. The time it would take for you to save enough Barter to afford a Savings 1 purchase would be far beyond the scope of the game, at least that's how I envision it.

A thought's just struck me. If Barter is your ability to quickly solve short-term problems - capital and lowercase - then it's a way to circumvent friendship and relationships. You could get your friends together to help you watch these foals, or you could drop 1 Barter on a day at the local fair to keep them busy. Having lots of Barter encourages independence, as it drastically increases the number of problems you can solve yourself. Savings, by comparison, are spent on community/big projects, and can't really be done in a vacuum. If anything, having high Savings means that folks expect you to use that money wisely on stuff that benefits everybody, not just yourself. But since Barter can - in a sense - be used to keep Problems under control, and thus forestall Catastrophes, the community already benefits from you spending this money on yourself.

I don't know what to do with that thought nor how much refining it needs, but I had to get it out of my head first.

[Anarion]

I'm curious as to what logic you're using to determine whether to reward or penalize specific books for dating other ponies.

How come The Mayor and Entertainer get only bad things while the Volunteer and Shopkeeper get only good things? :smallconfused:

Best drama is always the answer to that question. Some ponies are incentivized to date, others are not incentivized, but when it happens it gives them a responsibility (not capped, just the English word) that adds to their story in a positive way.


It seems like the mayor would get a ludicrous amount of money with this, depending on how barter is going to work and what one can get with it. And there is the very real possibility of constantly screwing others with 7-9s, which may very well make people less likely to take those actions, leading to a bit of a downwards spiral. Will there be anything someone can spend barter on that does not require a roll?


I don't think so. Remember that it comes with a risk since a failed roll might mean bad things. In addition, I think the amount of barter per character shouldn't be incredibly high, and purchases should be infrequent.

That said, if there are a lot of 1-barter purchases (or do something nice uses), that might be a problem with the move. Maybe it should be a % thing, though tracking 1/2 barter or 1/3 barter seems stupid, so maybe it can only trigger a finite number of times instead, or only on large purchases?



These seasonal things might be not very interesting choices, depending on the pace of seasons passing (mostly a concern for PbP) (I am assuming Builds Infrastructure and Works... are seasonal things). Also may want to put a cap (+2 or +3) on Civic Pride.


It's once per season and it wears off at the end of the season. That's a natural cap of +1.



I think this one has a few too many options. You could maybe consolidate a few? ex. "Cut down the time or cost of the project". Since they're all positive things, you could make it hold 2/1 instead.

I'd say keep the same number of hold, maybe remove 1 option as suggested.


With all that's going on in my head, I nearly forgot about this thread. :smallredface:

Since the only remaining point in the Responsibility/Problem/Catastrophe discussion is Catastrophe triggers, I'll have more words to say in defense of my idea later.

I can throw in some Barter/Savings thoughts right now. I do like the idea of Barter being your walking around, "How do I resolve this problem quickly" money. It's the funds you dip into when there's a thing you need to resolve a Problem, or get something small done. Furthermore, it's an amount so insignificant compared to Savings that you can't really make an equivalency. The time it would take for you to save enough Barter to afford a Savings 1 purchase would be far beyond the scope of the game, at least that's how I envision it.

A thought's just struck me. If Barter is your ability to quickly solve short-term problems - capital and lowercase - then it's a way to circumvent friendship and relationships. You could get your friends together to help you watch these foals, or you could drop 1 Barter on a day at the local fair to keep them busy. Having lots of Barter encourages independence, as it drastically increases the number of problems you can solve yourself. Savings, by comparison, are spent on community/big projects, and can't really be done in a vacuum. If anything, having high Savings means that folks expect you to use that money wisely on stuff that benefits everybody, not just yourself. But since Barter can - in a sense - be used to keep Problems under control, and thus forestall Catastrophes, the community already benefits from you spending this money on yourself.

I don't know what to do with that thought nor how much refining it needs, but I had to get it out of my head first.

This is an interesting thought. It seems to me that there should be some problems that can't be solved with barter, others that can, and still others where barter can provide an advantage without solving it fully. It certainly makes sense that barter would equate to independence in a lot of cases, especially if you expand it as a category to include useful goods and services, not just cash.

[Madcrafter]

I don't think so. Remember that it comes with a risk since a failed roll might mean bad things. In addition, I think the amount of barter per character shouldn't be incredibly high, and purchases should be infrequent.

That said, if there are a lot of 1-barter purchases (or do something nice uses), that might be a problem with the move. Maybe it should be a % thing, though tracking 1/2 barter or 1/3 barter seems stupid, so maybe it can only trigger a finite number of times instead, or only on large purchases?Yeah, we don't know yet how often barter purchases will happen. It comes with risk, sure, but it isn't like the mayor has a choice after they take the move.


It's once per season and it wears off at the end of the season. That's a natural cap of +1.I mean for the stat in total. The stat bonuses in other games are capped, and even one that is only for a season should probably be the too (though if it is the only way to get a stat (no stat bonuses from experience) above +2 it is naturally capped).

[Ezeze]

Best drama is always the answer to that question. Some ponies are incentivized to date, others are not incentivized, but when it happens it gives them a responsibility (not capped, just the English word) that adds to their story in a positive way.

It seems more likely that Mayor and Entertainer ponies just won't date, especially because there are lots of other ways those books can gain Responsibilities.

[Anarion]

Yeah, we don't know yet how often barter purchases will happen. It comes with risk, sure, but it isn't like the mayor has a choice after they take the move.


We don't know, but we can create! What we've seen is that dice-based barter moves allow spending barter in the 1-3 range. Given the power of those moves, and the ability to use barter to auto-hit Do Something Nice, I think that no single character should ever be running around with double digit barter. That's way too much automatic power. If it happens, it should be because that character carefully, thoughtfully hoarded things and held off from every paying for anything and doing anything when needed.

I also would like it if Barter is usable without rolls on just buying stuff. Game rules effect being variable. If you buy a bag of carrots, there's no special "I have a bag of carrots" roll bonus. But if you've got a bag of carrots and you later need to do a bunny round-up, the MC might reasonably let you take advantage of your purchase, either to accomplish your task, allow a roll that otherwise wouldn't be allowed, or provide a better/more complete success on a roll you were making anyway.

I'd say that regular everyday stuff should be 1 barter (e.g. foodstuffs, one day of filly-sitting, regular books), special services or high end merchandise should be 2-barter (e.g. average quality Rarity dress, books of regular spells, hoof-crafted cloud sculpture), top class goods and services should be 3-barter (e.g. high-end Rarity dress, custom spellcasting by a skilled unicorn, hired a pegasus weather team for a day), and absolutely exception things should cost 4+ barter (e.g. hold your own party with Princess Celestia in Canterlot Castle, have the Wonderbolts give you a personal performance, acquire the Alicorn Amulet).



I mean for the stat in total. The stat bonuses in other games are capped, and even one that is only for a season should probably be the too (though if it is the only way to get a stat (no stat bonuses from experience) above +2 it is naturally capped).

Oh, AW caps all bonuses to rolls to a maximum of +4 iirc (that would be a maxed stat plus someone helping you, or a combination of assorted bonuses). I'd stick with that and was assuming that we were doing so.

[Anarion]

It seems more likely that Mayor and Entertainer ponies just won't date, especially because there are lots of other ways those books can gain Responsibilities.

But somepony might try to date them. :smallwink:

Edit: though a thought for Thanqol. AW has the hot stat and the seduce move, which can allow NPCs to ask for sex as a way for a character initiating that move to get what he wants. That mechanically creates tough choices for people like Operators and Drivers if they ever decide to roll +hot. This game, on the other hand, doesn't have that sort of built-in romance in the mechanics, so we might want to think about what sorts of moves could prompt shipping or if it's something that should just happen through gameplay and doesn't need mechanical support.

[Ezeze]

But somepony might try to date them. :smallwink:

Maybe that explains why Spike pursues Rarity and Rarity ignores him? :smallwink::smalltongue:


Also! Also! Also! We need a mechanic for pets! :smallbiggrin: Or at least we need to specifically mention that pets are one possible responsiblity :smallwink:

[Thanqol]

No lawmaking power for the mayor? :smalltongue:

You think Princess Celestia lets that power out of her hooves?

Mayor doesn't mean literal mayor, it means the one wot organises the people.


I'm curious as to what logic you're using to determine whether to reward or penalize specific books for dating other ponies.

How come The Mayor and Entertainer get only bad things while the Volunteer and Shopkeeper get only good things? :smallconfused:

The dating moves aren't bonuses. They're pre-packaged relationship drama, and they're designed with that in mind.

I was very close to having the Shopkeeper having to roll to not freak out whenever her romantic partner tried to use her for money.


It seems like the mayor would get a ludicrous amount of money with this, depending on how barter is going to work and what one can get with it. And there is the very real possibility of constantly screwing others with 7-9s, which may very well make people less likely to take those actions, leading to a bit of a downwards spiral. Will there be anything someone can spend barter on that does not require a roll?

One: That move should be optional, you're right.
Two: Accidentally screwing people over would be the natural balancing point.
Three: Without a move, the current Barter setup allows the generation of 2 barter per season max. With a move that raises to 3, with two moves, 4. This assumes they spend their Seasonal move on generating barter. Assuming three other players that's about 6 barter max in circulation per season, which is about 3-4 barter generated by the mayor. 3 per season is roughly the minimum which is still about 2 generated.

Hmm, when I put it like that it does sound like too much and I should cut it down a bit.

Maybe, 'for each point of barter someone else spends, mark 1. When you have marked 5, erase and gain one barter.'


These seasonal things might be not very interesting choices, depending on the pace of seasons passing (mostly a concern for PbP) (I am assuming Builds Infrastructure and Works... are seasonal things). Also may want to put a cap (+2 or +3) on Civic Pride.

I'm vaguely thinking that there might be a season every 'session' but that's not a given yet.


I think this one has a few too many options. You could maybe consolidate a few? ex. "Cut down the time or cost of the project". Since they're all positive things, you could make it hold 2/1 instead.

Hmm maybe.


I'd say that regular everyday stuff should be 1 barter (e.g. foodstuffs, one day of filly-sitting, regular books), special services or high end merchandise should be 2-barter (e.g. average quality Rarity dress, books of regular spells, hoof-crafted cloud sculpture), top class goods and services should be 3-barter (e.g. high-end Rarity dress, custom spellcasting by a skilled unicorn, hired a pegasus weather team for a day), and absolutely exception things should cost 4+ barter (e.g. hold your own party with Princess Celestia in Canterlot Castle, have the Wonderbolts give you a personal performance, acquire the Alicorn Amulet).

I don't like this scale because the more barter gets pinned down in specifics the less narratively useful it is.


But somepony might try to date them. :smallwink:

Edit: though a thought for Thanqol. AW has the hot stat and the seduce move, which can allow NPCs to ask for sex as a way for a character initiating that move to get what he wants. That mechanically creates tough choices for people like Operators and Drivers if they ever decide to roll +hot. This game, on the other hand, doesn't have that sort of built-in romance in the mechanics, so we might want to think about what sorts of moves could prompt shipping or if it's something that should just happen through gameplay and doesn't need mechanical support.

Urgh, no, it can happen at it's own pace.

[Thanqol]

THIRD CONSOLODATION/EDITING WAVE

Stuff highlighted in RED is being looked at for review.



BASIC MOVES:

HONESTY

Ask Your Friends For Help

When you want to ask your friends for help with one of your Problems, roll +Honesty

On a 10+ Both
On a 7-9 choose one:
- You can bring yourself to explain the problem out loud
- You can accept their help when they offer it




LOYALTY

Help Out
When you help someone out roll +Loyalty
10+: You significantly help them with whatever they're trying to accomplish.
7-9: You make a useful contribution to their task



GENEROSITY

Do Something Nice
When you do something nice (gift/party/etc) for someone else, roll +Generous:

10+: Pick two
7-9: Pick one:
- They take +1 forwards
- They admire and respect your work
- You can relieve them of their stress, panic or sadness



KINDNESS

Empathise With Someone
When you empathise with someone else roll +kind. On a 10+ mark 3, on a 7-9 mark 1. Over the course of the conversation you can spend those points to ask:
- How could I assure you that _?
- What is the crux of your resistance or reluctance?
- Who might win you over if I cannot?
- What is your character really feeling?




LAUGHTER

Act Under Pressure
When you act under pressure roll +laughter. On a 10+, choose 3, on 7-9 choose 1.

- You inspire _ to follow you
- You can manage one additional task at the same time
- You keep your cool
- You startle, shock or scatter _







"Here's how it works. Every one of the basic moves has it's evil opposite: The far superior and more useful Discord Move! Discord moves replace that boring highlight system - might be a failed move consequence? and let ponies actually solve their problems for a change! Let's take a look!


Flipped Honesty: Useful Lies

While your Honesty is flipped you can't tell anyone about your problems. Sorry folks!

But what you can do is roll +Honesty when you try to lie to get someone else to do your work.

If it's a PC:
On a 10+ Transfer one of your responsibilities to them.
On a 7-9 they have to put aside what they're doing until they've contributed something to solving one of your Problems.

If it's a NPC:
On a 10+ They'll help you with the project for as long as the lie holds!
On a 7-9 they have to put aside what they're doing until they've contributed something to solving one of your Problems.



Flipped Loyalty: Feud

While your Loyalty is flipped you can't help other people decide between their problems BUT WHY WOULD YOU WANT TO?

But what you can do is roll +Loyalty when you punish those who have crossed you! Why encourage them to pick your side when you can RUIN EVERYONE ELSE'S SIDES?

10+: Give them a new Problem of your choice and get away clean.
7-9: Give them a new Problem, but they know you're to blame for it.


Flipped Generosity: Due Credit

While your Generosity is flipped you don't act for free and you can't do nice things for others, which is good because you're not running a charity. Unless you're actually running a charity in which case we call this overhead.

But when someone else has accomplished something, you surely deserve a bit of that, right? Roll +Generosity when you claim the credit for someone else's resolved problem or responsibility.

10+: You're recognised as the real mind behind the success and you get the lion's share of the credit and all the rewards!
7-9: You're recognised as having made a valuable contribution and get a partial share of the credit and rewards!


Flipped Kindness: Where They're Weak

You have been kind for too long! IT'S TIME TO BE CRUEL! While your Kindness is flipped you cannot empathise with anyone else.

The more than adequate consolation for this is the ability to look for weaknesses and roll +Kind (10+ ask 3, 7-9 ask 1 blah blah) in order ask questions off the following list:

- How could I get you to _?
- What here is the most valuable to you?
- Who has the most leverage over you?
- Where is your character weak to me?


Flipped Laughter: Centre Of Attention

What you COULD do is run yourself ragged multitasking to get everything done before the deadline. You know, if you were an idiot.

But what you SHOULD do is bare your pain and struggle for all to see, make yourself the centre of attention, and roll +laughter!

On a 10+: They can't make meaningful progress towards any of their own problems until your problem is dealt with first!
On a 7-9: They can't make meaningful progress towards any of their own problems until they've given you some aid towards your problem!


You're WELCOME."

THE HEARTH

By default your home has enough space for you and any family members who live with you.

What is the nature of your home? Choose 1.

- A hollowed out tree
- A wooden building in the town centre
- A gathering of clouds
- A country manor
- A forest cottage
- A structure of stone and earth
- An older ruin
- A tower or lookout
- Or as you choose

What are it's biggest problems? Choose 2 - nb look for a way to reduce in play?

- Termites, parasprites and insect pests
- Bordering the Everfree
- Shoddy construction
- Ancient curse or secrets
- Loud, grumpy or feuding neighbours
- Looks hideous/overgrown
- Finances in arrears
- Public access
- Profoundly uncomfortable
- Inconvenient location
- Attracts monsters
- Someone wants it/wants it gone

What does your household contain? Choose 2

- An armoury
- A bridge
- A dairy
- Farmland
- Fine furnishings
- A kitchen and pantry
- A lake
- A library
- A wardrobe of fine outfits
- Music equipment
- Treasures, antiques and curios
- A basement or cellar
- A guest bedroom
- A river
- A greenhouse
- Accommodation for many animals
- A pet or pets
- Fortifications
- A sacred shrine
- Vast amounts of miscellaneous clutter
- Potions and cauldrons
- Medical facilities
- Orchards or vineyards
- Intimidating décor
- Majestic exterior
- Luxury bathroom
- A smithy
- Carpentry tools
- Expanses of empty land
- A shopfront
- A great hall
- A beautiful garden
- A magical location
- Tunnels and hidden passages
- A prison or a vault
- An astrological observatory

IMPROVEMENT:
(): Repair a damaged improvement
(): Stock supplies and provisions
()()(): Add a permanent improvement
()()(): Add a new room
()()(): Purchase a secondary home, begins with no improvements

SEASONAL MOVES:

Tend To Your Home:
When you spend the season working on your home, roll +barter spent (minimum 1).
10+: Fill in two circles
7-9: Fill in one circle

Invest In Infrastructure
When you spend the season investing in infrastructure, roll +Savings spent (minimum 1)
10+: Fill in two circles
7-9 Fill in one circle

N.B. When embarking on an infrastructure project, the MC assigns a number of circles between 2 and 5 to represent the scale and difficulty of the project. Circles can be filled in as a reward for completing responsibilities as well as through this move.

Work For Another:
When you spend the season working for someone else, roll +laughter. On a 10+ choose 2 of the following, on a 7-9 choose 1:
- You begin the new season with two barter worth of pay (otherwise you begin with 1)
- You begin the season comfortable and unstressed (otherwise you are exhausted from your labours)
- You begin the season having discharged your obligations entirely

Invest Your Money
When you spend the season working on your savings, roll +barter (minimum 1) spent:
10+: Increase your savings by one level, and regain a point of barter
7-9: Increase your savings by one level.

Currently the 10+ result makes it too good compared to Work For Another, also Savings need to be revisited in general

Travel:
When you spend the season travelling to strange new places, roll +barter spent:
10+: Choose two
7-9: Choose one

You return with an exotic item, trick or technique.
You return refreshed and relaxed
You return with news and stories from afar, preparing you for what comes

Work For All:
When you spend the season working to benefit with your community, roll +Generous.
10+: Erase any two problems
7-9: Erase any one problem



Introducing,

THE FARMER

"At the end of the day, what everyone really wants is a roof over your head and a family to come home to. Everythin' else is built on top of that."

CORE RESPONSIBILITY: Hearth

Stats: +2 Honesty, +1, +1, 0, -1

Moves: All the basic moves, pick two Farmer moves.

Savings: Breaking Even 4

Farmer Special: When you date someone else, that person counts as a member of your family.

Moves:
It All Begins At Home: When you work on your home you may roll +Honesty instead of spending Barter.

Many hands, Light Work: You have a sibling who can help you out. Pick one:
* Talented: Your sibling is really good at something; you decide what it is
* Reliable: Your sibling just doesn't have any drama in his life.
* Watchful: Your sibling will sometimes identify problems before they arise.

Granddaddy built this farm: Add 2 improvements to your home.

Cash Crops: At the start of every Season gain one Barter.

Heart of the Family: You automatically become aware of any problems that have to do with your family members and can tell them about your problems without a roll.

Seeds On The Breeze: Your family is widespread and important. When you go somewhere new you can always find a family member to meet up with or stay with.

Introducing,

THE GUARDIAN

"Don't have any money? You know why I don't have any money? BECAUSE I SPENT THE LAST SIX MONTHS WRESTLING THE NIGHTMARE DIMENSION, YOU UNGRATEFUL BASTARD!"

Core responsibility: Magic

Stats: +2 Laughter, +1, +1, 0, -1

Moves: All the basic moves, pick 2 Guardian moves

Savings: In the red 2

Guardian Special: When you date someone else, that person's love might be a valuable component in fighting evil.

Moves:
Enormous Capacity For Violence: When you get in a fight you are prepared and ready for, you will probably win and never straight up lose.

Books! I love books!: When you encounter a strange new Problem, go to the books and roll with the number of people assisting you:
10+ choose 2:
7-9: choose 1:
Ask the MC a question, they must answer truthfully.
The MC must create a secret weakness for one magical NPC and tell you what it is.
You don't find any knowledge in the books, but you find something else that can help you with your problem while researching (MC's decision)
Take +1 Ongoing against this Problem

Eccentric: You're obviously too crazy and useless to be trusted with any real responsibility. Whenever a catastrophe happens you catch none of the blame.

Mentor Figure: You have a mentor or mentors you can turn to when you need assistance. Pick one:
- Important: Your mentor has great political importance.
- Powerful: Your mentor has vast personal prowess
- Wise: Your mentor always knows just the right thing to say

I Told You This Was Important!: When a Magical problem reveals itself you gain access to Centre of Attention and Act Under Pressure at the same time.

Save The World Off Camera: When you succeed when working to benefit your community you may erase an additional problem.


Introducing,

THE SHOPKEEPER

"My cabbages!"

CORE RESPONSIBILITY: Business

Stats: +2 Generosity, +1, +1, 0, -1

Moves: All the basic moves, pick two Shopkeeper moves

Savings: In the black 5

Shopkeeper Special: Once per season, you can Do Something Nice for the person you're dating and automatically succeed at a 10+.

Moves:

Luxury Goods: When you spend the season working for someone else, roll +generosity instead and if you are successful add 1 Barter in addition to the other rewards.

Product Placement: After you have successfully Done Something Nice for someone struggling with a Problem, you can roll to Claim The Credit for the outcome of that Problem if it is resolved within the same season.

Gathering Inspiration: When you spend the season travelling you can roll +Generosity rather than +Barter

Universal Appeal: You can Do Something Nice even for the most fearsome or antisocial monsters.

Market Research: When you want to know something about someone important (your call), roll +Generosity. 10+ ask three, 7-9 ask one.
* What are they currently on the lookout for?
* Who are their connections or contacts?
* Who do they think is the most important person in this room?
* When should I next expect to see them?
* What are they saying about me behind my back?

Good Karma: Add the following option to the Do Something Nice list:
- They'll help you out whenever you next need it.


Introducing,

The Assistant

"I'd never leave my friends hanging!"

CORE RESPONSIBILITY: Personal

Stats: +2 Loyalty, +1, +1, 0, -1

Moves: All the basic moves, get Devotion - thinking about a different word for this, devoted/devotee doesn't flowand one other Assistant move.

Savings: Treading Water 3

Assistant Special: When you date someone they count as an additional Devotion.

Moves:

Devotion: Choose one of the other player characters to be the subject of your Devotion. You gain +1 to any roll that has to do with your Devoted.

The Crush: When you have a crush on someone then they count as an additional Devotion. You can have as many crushes as you want but they have to be fairly important to you in order to continue mattering. The Crush does not have to be romantic.

Love And Hate: You may always use both the Loyalty moves on your Devoted.

Shoulder To Cry On: When your Devoted tells you about their problems, roll +Loyalty to help them:
10+: They erase one of their Problems and you choose one
- Mark XP
- Take 1 forwards
- They transfer one of their Responsibilities to you.

7-9: They choose 1
- They erase one of their problems
- They transfer one of their Responsibilities to you.

Last Resort: Each Season you always count as having stocked additional supplies and provisions in addition to anything else you did.

Guardian Angel: Whenever your Devoted is in any kind of physical danger you are always there to save them.

Introducing,

The Entertainer

"I am the GREAT and POWERFUL TRIXIE!!"

CORE RESPONSIBILITY: Stage

Stats: +2 Laughter, +1, +1, 0, -1

Moves: All the basic moves, choose 2 Entertainer Moves

Savings: In The Black 5

Entertainer Special: When you date someone else, if they don't turn up to one of your performances take -1 ongoing until you next talk to them.

Moves:

Get The Band Together!: You can link up any number of other people in music regardless of their individual talents, rehearsals, sheet music or any of that nonsense. - worth a move?

Light That Shines Within: When you're going all out while performing to a crowd, roll +laughter. On a 10+ hold 3, 7-9 hold 1. Spend your hold one for one to make the crowd:
- Burst into uninhibited emotional displays
- Focus on the music to the exclusion of all else
- Have the greatest time of their lives
- Forget what they were talking about just before the show started
- Put aside their differences temporarily while performing a task

If your Laughter is reversed you may also choose from this list:
- Scam them out of their money
- Boo and heckle your competitors

Bass Cannon: You have access to some serious business piece of entertainment hardware, like a one man band, party cannon, Sonic Rainboom, etc. You detail.

Upstage!: You are immune to any attempt to Take The Credit or otherwise overshadow your contribution.

Reputation: When you meet someone for the first time, if you decide they've heard of you roll +laughter.
10+: You decide what they've heard of you and you take +1 forwards with them
7-9: You decide what they've heard about you.
On a miss the MC decides what they've heard about you.

Exit, Stage Left: When a great magician has to leave the scene she does so with style. Roll +laughter:
10+: You're gone, with style.
7-9: You're gone, but not without embarrassing yourself somehow

Introducing,

THE VOLUNTEER

"Anybody could do what I do. Nobody does, though."

CORE RESPONSIBILITY: Defence

Stats: +2 Kindness, +1, +1, 0, -1

Moves: All the basic moves, pick two Volunteer moves.

Savings: Treading Water 3

Volunteer Special: When you're dating someone you can always use both of your Kindness moves on them at any distance.

Moves:

Rescue 911: Whenever there is a disaster in the town you count as a team of fifteen for the purposes of rescue and containment.

Lockdown: You can find a way to immobilise or contain theoretically anything - though not necessarily without some major construction. - needs rework

Animal Whisperer: You can converse, interact and use Moves on animals as though they were people.

Political Protest: When you spend the Season protesting against unjust political or economic policies (you decide) roll +Kindness:
10+: You can replace one piece of local Infrastructure with something that better suits you.
7-9: You can block progress or use of any piece of Infrastructure you disagree with.

Graduate: When you treat a serious injury or illness, you can do it but, roll +Kindness:
10+: Pick one
7-9: Pick three

- The treatment will be expensive
- The treatment will be time consuming
- The treatment will have strange or magical side effects
- The treatment will require something unusual
- The treatment will require the patient to change their behaviour in a way they won't like

Danger Sense: Whenever a Problem is created that poses a risk to life or limb roll +Kindness:
10+: Both
7-9: Choose one:
- You sense where it'll come from.
- You sense what it is.

Introducing,

THE MAYOR

CORE RESPONSIBILITY: Civic

Stats: +2 Honesty, +1, +1, 0, -1

Moves: All the basic moves, pick two Mayor moves

Savings: In the black 5

Mayor Special: When you date someone, if they ever fail one of their Responsibilities you take -1 forward.

Moves:

Council Summons: When you call a town meeting, declare who you want to have present (including 'everyone (http://youtu.be/74BzSTQCl_c)') and roll +Honesty:
10+: Everyone shows up
7-9: About three quarters of everyone shows up

Tax Code: When anyone spends Barter, roll with a bonus equal to the Barter spent:
10+: You gain one Barter
7-9: You gain one Barter and they take -1 on their roll

Community Construction: Whenever anyone Builds Infrastructure or Works On Their Home, mark one circle towards any project for free, including one of your own.

Herding: When you co-ordinate people towards a goal, roll +Honesty. 10+ hold 3, 7-9 hold 1. Spend your Hold to:

- Convince everyone to work together for the duration of the project
- Cut down the time taken for the project
- Inspire someone to reach outside themselves to help with the project
- Make the end result of particular quality
- Convince someone who wouldn't normally help to pitch in to the project

Civic Pride: Once per Season you can reward someone else with a medal, trophy or other honour. They take +1 to any one stat of your choice until the end of the Season.

Realpolitick: When a major project is in danger of failing, you gain access to both Honesty moves.

[TheAmishPirate]

If I might throw in a suggestion to replace Lockdown for the Volunteer, what about something like this:

Circle the Wagons - You can quickly build up defensive structures, but with such short notice you have to scavenge materials from another piece of infrastructure.

It more fits in line with what I see the Volunteer doing. They aren't the pony who can build a cage for anything given enough materials and advance notice. They're the pony who hears of an incoming flood, and rallies everypony to build some makeshift levies to save the town. They might wreck up the new bridge the Shopkeeper's been working on for ages, but better a single bridge than the whole town. They'll sort out the damages once everypony's safe.

[Thanqol]

Oh, speaking of, feel free to suggest new/alternate Moves for any of the Playbooks using the existing ones as a guide as to themes and balance and such.

[Thanqol]

I've decided to make everyone start at Savings 3. It makes the economy much much simpler to manage.

[Ezeze]

Are we moving forward with Ponies being rewarded for Responsibilities instead of Problems? If so, then I think before you go attaching Problems to houses you should determine whether or not you want Responsibilities attached to them. If yes, then those Problems can come up over the course of play instead of being assigned at the beginning.

As for Assistant, roll it back to the source material. Spike is Twilight Sparkle's Assistant. What is Twilight Sparkle to Spike? Why, his Best Friend! So instead of Devotion/Devoted/Devotee, how about we call the move Best of Friends, and call the pony the Assistant is assisting their Best Friend?

I don't think Get The Band Together is a good move at all, especially considering there is no system in place to determine whether or not a specific person has any musical talent. *World just doesn't care, so don't try to make it.

I think the big reason you're having trouble defining "Lockdown" as a Volunteer ability is that it really belongs under more of a Solider/Sheriff book.

The Partial Success for Tax Code should impose conditions on the person who made the roll, not someone else.

.... I don't have any strong opinions on anything else :smalltongue:

[TheAmishPirate]

I've decided to make everyone start at Savings 3. It makes the economy much much simpler to manage.

Plus, you can still play around with rich/poor by giving the Guardian little to no way to gain Barter normally.


As for Assistant, roll it back to the source material. Spike is Twilight Sparkle's Assistant. What is Twilight Sparkle to Spike? Why, his Best Friend! So instead of Devotion/Devoted/Devotee, how about we call the move Best of Friends, and call the pony the Assistant is assisting their Best Friend?

I thought there was a mechanic in place for Best Friends? If that's the case, then maybe something around the lines of "Like a brother/sister", or something to do with family.


Input's going to be a bit sparse. Arms flaring up again.

[Anarion]

I'm still somewhat unclear on the whole responsibilities/problems/barter/savings interaction, especially what has mechanical rules vs. what is just stuff in the game. Best way I can think to get at it is to give an example of how one character's game might play out, and then either that will make sense, or somebody will come in and be like "ugh, no!"

So, let's say I'm a Guardian. I always have a MAGIC responsibility. To start my game, I have the responsibility:
Prevent the Everfree from Encroaching on the Town

There might be several problems associated with this. Initial or early developing problems might be:
Timberwolves are preventing pony teams from fighting off the forest growth
Pegasus weather work can't affect the forest
The first team sent to investigate didn't come back
The ultimate cause of the forest acting up more wildly than normal is unknown

If some of these problems are solved, the forest is held at bay. If they're all solved and I get the proper spell focus built to solve the underlying cause of the forest's malevolence, the responsibility goes away and the town might reward me. If I fail to address any of the problems for too long because I'm busy helping Applejack buck apples, then there's a catastrophe. Since I'm a Guardian, it's a big, BIG catastrophe. Something like:
The forest invades the town, wrecking X% of everypony's infrastructure and preventing any new building until it's at least beaten back.

The actual resolution of the problems would involve a combination of my own talents and obtaining the aid of my friends for critical tasks, and that would constitute the majority of the gameplay.

Does that sound like what everyone has in mind?

[SiuiS]

I'm still somewhat unclear on the whole responsibilities/problems/barter/savings interaction, especially what has mechanical rules vs. what is just stuff in the game. Best way I can think to get at it is to give an example of how one character's game might play out, and then either that will make sense, or somebody will come in and be like "ugh, no!"

So, let's say I'm a Guardian. I always have a MAGIC responsibility. To start my game, I have the responsibility:
Prevent the Everfree from Encroaching on the Town

There might be several problems associated with this. Initial or early developing problems might be:
Timberwolves are preventing pony teams from fighting off the forest growth
Pegasus weather work can't affect the forest
The first team sent to investigate didn't come back
The ultimate cause of the forest acting up more wildly than normal is unknown

If some of these problems are solved, the forest is held at bay. If they're all solved and I get the proper spell focus built to solve the underlying cause of the forest's malevolence, the responsibility goes away and the town might reward me. If I fail to address any of the problems for too long because I'm busy helping Applejack buck apples, then there's a catastrophe. Since I'm a Guardian, it's a big, BIG catastrophe. Something like:
The forest invades the town, wrecking X% of everypony's infrastructure and preventing any new building until it's at least beaten back.

The actual resolution of the problems would involve a combination of my own talents and obtaining the aid of my friends for critical tasks, and that would constitute the majority of the gameplay.

Does that sound like what everyone has in mind?

That sounds like what I envisioned at first but then lost track of. If that's what you read into the rules since, then it means that the game stayed true to the core of things and I just couldn't parse the language.

[Thanqol]

Are we moving forward with Ponies being rewarded for Responsibilities instead of Problems? If so, then I think before you go attaching Problems to houses you should determine whether or not you want Responsibilities attached to them. If yes, then those Problems can come up over the course of play instead of being assigned at the beginning.

Responsibilities are rewarded, not Problems. Problems are flexible.


As for Assistant, roll it back to the source material. Spike is Twilight Sparkle's Assistant. What is Twilight Sparkle to Spike? Why, his Best Friend! So instead of Devotion/Devoted/Devotee, how about we call the move Best of Friends, and call the pony the Assistant is assisting their Best Friend?

Urgh, no, I would not describe Spike's relationship with Twilight as 'friends'. Let alone his relationship with Rarity.


I don't think Get The Band Together is a good move at all, especially considering there is no system in place to determine whether or not a specific person has any musical talent. *World just doesn't care, so don't try to make it.

Yeah. Need a replacement though.


I thought there was a mechanic in place for Best Friends? If that's the case, then maybe something around the lines of "Like a brother/sister", or something to do with family.

Not even that, that's way too constraining, especially with The Crush.


I'm still somewhat unclear on the whole responsibilities/problems/barter/savings interaction, especially what has mechanical rules vs. what is just stuff in the game. Best way I can think to get at it is to give an example of how one character's game might play out, and then either that will make sense, or somebody will come in and be like "ugh, no!"

So, let's say I'm a Guardian. I always have a MAGIC responsibility. To start my game, I have the responsibility:
Prevent the Everfree from Encroaching on the Town

There might be several problems associated with this. Initial or early developing problems might be:
Timberwolves are preventing pony teams from fighting off the forest growth
Pegasus weather work can't affect the forest
The first team sent to investigate didn't come back
The ultimate cause of the forest acting up more wildly than normal is unknown

If some of these problems are solved, the forest is held at bay. If they're all solved and I get the proper spell focus built to solve the underlying cause of the forest's malevolence, the responsibility goes away and the town might reward me. If I fail to address any of the problems for too long because I'm busy helping Applejack buck apples, then there's a catastrophe. Since I'm a Guardian, it's a big, BIG catastrophe. Something like:
The forest invades the town, wrecking X% of everypony's infrastructure and preventing any new building until it's at least beaten back.

The actual resolution of the problems would involve a combination of my own talents and obtaining the aid of my friends for critical tasks, and that would constitute the majority of the gameplay.

Does that sound like what everyone has in mind?

Yep, that's more or less where I'm going with this.

[Anarion]

Yep, that's more or less where I'm going with this.

Okay, so couple further thoughts coming off that. One, barter definitely needs to be tightly controlled. Since I can auto-hit Do Something Nice by spending Barter, as well as potentially buying important items, too much barter in the system nullifies the tension between solving my problems and needing to help others solve theirs. If somebody can buy her way out of all her problems, it should be the result of a combination of above average luck, careful resource management, and wildly successful efforts in convincing the rest of the players in the game to help out her character over previous seasons.

Two, and I'm taking this from Monster Hearts, the moves that characters select should have information in them that indicates to the MC and the other players what kinds of problems the PC wants to be good at handling. Similarly to how taking "Mess with Me, Mess with Him" as a Monster Hearts mortal is effectively a request for scenes where the mortal is caught out alone, the moves here should focus on determining what kinds of problems the players want to see happen in their games. I'll make an effort within the next day or two to take a pass over all the current playbooks with this perspective in mind.

[Ezeze]

Responsibilities are rewarded, not Problems. Problems are flexible.
I figured. So I wouldn't attach Problems to homes, not unless there is also a Responsibility to upkeep that home as well (note the capital P capital R :smallwink:)


Urgh, no, I would not describe Spike's relationship with Twilight as 'friends'.

Really? :smallconfused: Why not? Because the Friendship is Magic Wiki (http://mlp.wikia.com/wiki/Spike) describes it exactly that way. I don't understand your rationale.


He [Spike] is Twilight Sparkle's best friend and number one assistant.
I wasn't suggesting "Best Friends" for his relationship with Rarity - you're already using the word "Crush" for that, which works perfectly.

[Anarion]

Really? :smallconfused: Why not? Because the Friendship is Magic Wiki (http://mlp.wikia.com/wiki/Spike) describes it exactly that way. I don't understand your rationale.


I wasn't suggesting "Best Friends" for his relationship with Rarity - you're already using the word "Crush" for that, which works perfectly.

I dunno. They are good friends, but Twilight is also Spike's caretaker and a mother figure to him, while he is dependent on her for his home and upbringing. Spike's unusual in that he's also really sociable and has all these random Canterlot contacts that he knows, but is a young child in many important ways.

[Ezeze]

Twilight is also Spike's caretaker and a mother figure to him, while he is dependent on her for his home and upbringing.

That sounds more like Twilight's Responsibility than anything that needs to be attached to Spike.

[Anarion]

Taking a pass over the classes with an eye toward what kinds of problems their moves are asking for.

The farmer looks like a character that can simply do more than others. If she takes It All Begins At Home and Granddaddy Built this farm, she's going to have a great house that can handle a lot of problems and provide a base of support for her, freeing up barter for use to help her friends or solve her other problems. Cash crops just adds to this even further. Many Hands Light Work and Seeds on the Breeze, on the other hand, give the farmer a worse base but broader reach. A farmer with tons of family can effectively act in multiple places at once, but has relatively less safety if problems come up for her.

My feeling is that a farmer who takes the extra barter and home improvements is asking for big land-based problems that her home can endure where others would fail. A farmer that takes a lot of family is looking for opportunities to help out in a lot of places, but also to have family problems that they have to deal with from time to time. Family is more reach but more trouble, effectively.

Seeds on the Breeze strikes me as the odd move out. If it's taken, the farmer is asking to leave the strong base established by the rest of her moves and to have a story that spans multiple locations, which is a big demand that could easily sweep up every other player in the game too.

The Guardian seems like a loner class in a lot of ways. Moves like Enormous Capacity for Violence, Books!, and Save the World Off Camera all enable the Guardian to solve certain problems all by their lonesome. If the Guardian's challenge is "I need to kill these timberwolves and find the weakness of the warlock that summoned them" no help is required. Mentor figure can fit in this as well, since it can open up aid or an information source without needing to consult another player.

I Told You This Was Important appears to me to be asking for HUGE threats. Since it basically enables the Guardian to demand help from every other character, it makes sense that a character who has that move is going to be facing Season Finale bosses that require the whole cast to unite on a regular basis.

Eccentric feels off to me. It basically allow the Guardian to shirk her job without facing the consequences, but runs counter to the rest of her moves, which all make her better at handling her problems on her own. It might be better if it more directly made the Guardian better at doing stuff outside her area of expertise so she's not completely useless to others' problems. Something like
Practical Magic: When assisting another pony with a non-Magic responsibility, you can take +1 on the roll to Help Out.
Or Alternately, you can use Laughter instead of Loyalty to Help Out.


The Shopkeeper seems pretty focused on Barter and the Do Something Nice move. Product Placement, Universal Appeal, Market Research, and Good Karma all enable Do Something Nice and expand it to solve more and more problems. That might even be too much. I could easily build a shopkeeper whose only goal through multiple advances is "I will solve all my problems by giving people gifts to work for me." Maybe that's actually fine, since it's a pretty good drama source without needing anything else, but it's certainly a one-trick pony. :smalltongue:

The other moves enable you to get more barter by rolling +generosity for the stuff you do in the off season and hang on to your barter. Those moves aren't really asking for anything though, so mostly they just feed even further into the whole "I can do something nice for anybody, at any time."

My thought is that the shopkeeper is almost looking like the Gunlugger of this setting. They do one thing really goddamn well: they give gifts and get everybody else to help them out.

The assistant seems universally bad at solving his own problems. Shoulder to cry on is great to help somebody else who's in over their head, but if the assistant gets a non-person responsibility transferred to him, he's got no tools to handle it. Guardian Angel is begging for your devoted to be kidnapped or ensorcelled. Hope they're okay with that. Last resort isn't totally clear to me. I think it's asking for problems that demand a heavy resource investment and then giving you the opportunity to bail out your Devoted, but I don't know if MCs would always get that, and it's a move that could fall flat.

I'd especially take another look at this class. I think they're very scattered and asking for a lot of different things to happen without really having a good handle on their own capabilities.

The Entertainer strikes me as somewhat similar to the Guardian in that she's really good at dealing with her own problems and has minimal competency at helping anybody else. I'd consider making Light that Shines within mandatory, so you get that and one more instead of pick 2. It's clearly the core Entertainer move and it's probably wrong not to have it from the start. So no reason to give the new player an opportunity to screw themselves.

Reputation is definitely asking for a chance to meet and mingle with the Elite (Canterlot or otherwise) and could be a rare opportunity to help out a friend if one of the friend's problems could be solved by access to a VIP pony.

Bass Cannon is a request for some major shows, probably in front of huge crowds. Ideally requiring the help of your friends to pull of the whole operation.

Exit, Stage Left and Upstage! are both asking for rivals and complications in your show. Things go wrong, your rival's things go right, and you somehow have to make yourself look good in the process.

I don't think Get the Band Together is worth a move, but let's just make it broader so it is.
Improvised Cast and Crew
No matter what rag-tag ponies you manage to get together, when they're supporting you, everypony shines. As long as you can put together a crew to fill every necessary role in your show, no matter what kind of show it is, they'll perform spectacularly.

Rescue 911 and Lockdown (in whatever form it takes) are asking for bad things to happen so you can help out. Graduate is asking for those consequences to be even worse. Good thing your'e such a skilled Angel Medic! Danger Sense means that once in a while, you might even prevent the problem before anypony gets hurt.

Animal Whisperer means you want either problems with animals or problems where animals can legitimately help out as companions. Probably environmental issues. Political Protest also plays in here, and combines well with Animal Whisperer, I think, since it gives you a constituency that nobody else is going to respresent.

In rewriting lockdown, I think the basic intent is that you want big monsters as your problems (and ideally ones that your local Guardian doesn't just incinerate in magical fire). Maybe intelligent big monsters with their own agendas, so that you can stop them long enough to figure out what they want and solve their problem instead of just beating them up. So maybe
Defuse the Situation
You can understand and empathize with anything, no matter how large, monstrous, or grotesque. In addition, you can always ask "how can I get you to stop and talk?" with an empathy roll, even when you're not Discorded.



I think Herding should be a base move, you start with it plus one other mayor move. The mayor's responsibilities seem designed to all be large scale team projects, and you're just not going to be effective without Herding.

Council Summons means you want really big projects.

Realpolitik, Community Construction, and wherever Tax Code ends up are all selfish moves. They're saying "My projects matter and my advancement matters, no matter what the rest of you do." They don't really dictate what problems you have, but taking those moves gives the MC a choice: if the MC wants to be nice, they'll give the mayor problems that affect everypony so that it seems fair and right that the Mayor gets extra benefits. If the MC wants to make you look bad, they'll give the Mayor as many petty, small-scale, or personal problems as possible so that the mayor looks like a selfish bastard sucking the community dry.

Civic Pride is the one really selfless move, and probably should be taken by mayors who want a good reputation, since it enables them to provide positive incentive for other players to help them out, rather than just sucking away everyone's resources.

[Anarion]

That sounds more like Twilight's Responsibility than anything that needs to be attached to Spike.

You can be friends with your parents, but they'll always be your parents. It's not the same as a peer.

[Thanqol]

A super useful post, Anarion. Will do some deep thinks about it.

[Deadly]

Caught up with this at last. I'm not sure I can offer many useful thoughts at present, but I've got my eyes on it at least and will let you know if anything occurs to me.

[SiuiS]

Harm and savings:

Dark Ages uses harm as a thematic thing, much like FATE. The permanent harm at end of season is much like a Viking jarl who took a sword to the leg and will now die at 45 instead of 60. It fits the fiction, the tropes and the themes of such a game.

Going permanently bankrupt because you couldn't drop some jingle into your piggy doesn't seem to fit this game, though. What's your thought process and or justification there?

[Madcrafter]

Harm and savings:

Dark Ages uses harm as a thematic thing, much like FATE. The permanent harm at end of season is much like a Viking jarl who took a sword to the leg and will now die at 45 instead of 60. It fits the fiction, the tropes and the themes of such a game.

Going permanently bankrupt because you couldn't drop some jingle into your piggy doesn't seem to fit this game, though. What's your thought process and or justification there?I believe the idea was that there was a method of recovering from bankruptcy (or at least that is how I parsed it). Maybe the character is unable to help anyone for a season while they recover some money, but they aren't out forever.

[Ezeze]

Anyone interested in running a game, to see how the mechanics work in motion? :smallwink::smallbiggrin:

[Anarion]

Anyone interested in running a game, to see how the mechanics work in motion? :smallwink::smallbiggrin:

Not quite yet, I think.

[Ezeze]

Not quite yet, I think.

No?

We've got the core mechanics, we've got the classes. What are we missing that we need to do an alpha text?

[Anarion]

No?

We've got the core mechanics, we've got the classes. What are we missing that we need to do an alpha text?

I think we should have barter/savings rules hashed out, since we have no idea what scarcity or challenge the classes need to work against right now beyond "My starting number is 3." Also, Thanqol is probably considering a pass over the playbooks again and we don't know how to mechanically discord or undiscord moves. I'd say it's close, but I'd like to see another pass over it before we run it.

[Thanqol]

The best planning for this game is done while watching episodes of FiM. Ideally I'd just marathon the entire thing right now but I've got a 9-5 so my next sweep of updates and revisions is on hold until I have the time to re-watch pony. I plan to go through episodes and identify Move use and chaining and post analysis here. It's a bit of a delay but there ain't no rush on this thing, progress has already been really remarkable.

[Thanqol]

So, after speaking to the smartest and most handsome sempai~ I got some awesome things to think about.

Thought One:: Barter is now replaced with months of rent. The only unit of money is months of rent.

This is a brilliant idea stolen from a Noir detective game. Theoretically any problem can be solved with money - but knowing that getting the killers off your tail will cost you six months rent puts you in a major spot. You can play it safe and cold-hearted and keep your finances healthy, or you can take risks for your moral code and just barely keep your head above water - which leads to a great feedback loop where the desperation of struggling to survive makes you take even more risks.

Thought Two: Discord moves, and how they trigger.

I need to think carefully about when these become available and, importantly, what kind of playstyle the changes between them encourages. Where are the incentives? Does there need to be a push (XP?) to use the Discord moves?

One suggestion was, 'when you use Harmony moves (three) times, one of your stats flips to Discord. When you use three Discord moves one of your stats flips to Harmony'. That's super interesting and I need to think about how that would work in play very carefully.


Also, we're working on a specialised Exalted AW hack between us (two of the basic moves are Lead By Example and Walk Away and it's all focused around your beliefs and what you care about). Gonna be rad when it's done.

[SiuiS]

That's super interesting and I need to think about how that would work in play very carefully.

Gee, too bad you don't have a thread full of folks who already asked to do a playtest.

[Thanqol]

Gee, too bad you don't have a thread full of folks who already asked to do a playtest.

I need to work out what the intention is before I test to see if I am achieving my intention.

[Thanqol]

The Grand Campaign

Watching ponies under the pretence of research.


FRIENDSHIP IS MAGIC #1

Introducing Twilight Sparkle as the Guardian and Spike as the Assistant.

Twilight's magic used to be WAY more sparkly than it is now. Everyone's voices are also really different. Applejack's in particular.

New Guardian Responsibility: Nightmare Moon.

Immediately Twilight is distracted from her own problem by having to go and check on everyone else's.

Applebloom opens it off with "Centre of Attention" to stop Twilight from doing her job until she gets what she wants.

Rainbow Dash demonstrates her Responsibility of Weather Patrol and a recurring Problem of 'Lazy'.

Fluttershy botches her Honesty roll right off the bat.

And then everyone PAYS THE PRICE for ignoring and distracting the Guardian to focus on their own petty concerns.

I forgot how much I missed angry Twilight. This first episode is really well put together.

FRIENDSHIP IS MAGIC #2

Honesty roll: Success.

Roll +research; add secret weakness.

Back in the days when the Everfree Forest was a terrifying no-go zone.

Problem: Manticore! Solved with an Empathise roll.

Problem: Terror! Acting Under Pressure! Followed up with The Light That Shines Within.

Problem: Fashion! I love the occasional Fashion Problem in FIM. Do Something Nice! Do something nice seems like it should have a potential cost at 7-9.

moustache

Rainbow Dash gets a lot of mileage out of Assistant - Guardian Angel.

Gosh I love how the ponies just run around like derpbergers when they panic. Lyra has the best run cycle by like a million years.

I'm kind of shocked Hasbro never sold elements of harmony accessories for their ponies.

so cheesy.

Anyway, this establishes the precedent of Guardians not getting any rewards for their services. Except more work.


MORALS:
Look at Do Something Nice, consider adding a cost or downside.

Considering changing Ask Your Friends to have a "Take -1 Ongoing" as the 7-9 option instead, or some other consequence of wounded pride like that.

I need to think about colony simulator games and work out the intersections of those and ponies.

[SiuiS]

I need to work out what the intention is before I test to see if I am achieving my intention.

That's true, but "how do these not-quite-numbers compile in actual play" strikes me as good data to have if you're not sure how the not-quite-numbers compile. :smallwink:

[Madcrafter]

So with months of rent, would it just be able to accumulate infinitely, if one so chose? Or like the harm track would there be a hard limit on what the maximum was (but it wouldn't be unusual to be below this)?

[Thanqol]

So with months of rent, would it just be able to accumulate infinitely, if one so chose? Or like the harm track would there be a hard limit on what the maximum was (but it wouldn't be unusual to be below this)?

I'm thinking it can accumulate as much as you want but there are moves that cost it to use.

[Madcrafter]

I'm thinking it can accumulate as much as you want but there are moves that cost it to use.

Maybe it would make sense to have some things that cause percentage/fractional use of the resources then? Making them cost more if you choose to collect wealth could be a slight incentive to actually spend it every once in a while. It needs a way to avoid any major bookkeeping or rounding though. Just an thought I had last night.

Also would there be an easy method to trade it between characters?

[Thanqol]

Maybe it would make sense to have some things that cause percentage/fractional use of the resources then? Making them cost more if you choose to collect wealth could be a slight incentive to actually spend it every once in a while. It needs a way to avoid any major bookkeeping or rounding though. Just an thought I had last night.

The incentive to spend your money is all the nice things you can buy with your money.


Also would there be an easy method to trade it between characters?

Transferring months of rent counts as hitting Do Something Nice with a 10+.

[Anarion]

The incentive to spend your money is all the nice things you can buy with your money.



Transferring months of rent counts as hitting Do Something Nice with a 10+.

It occurs to me that one could do a minor hack by doing 3 way rent transfer. Anarion auto hits Do Something nice to Thanqol, who hits it to Madcrafter, who hits it to Anarion. 3 rolls all hit on 10+, no actual change of wealth.

[Thanqol]

It occurs to me that one could do a minor hack by doing 3 way rent transfer. Anarion auto hits Do Something nice to Thanqol, who hits it to Madcrafter, who hits it to Anarion. 3 rolls all hit on 10+, no actual change of wealth.

Ye-eeeesssss, this is literally how the economy works dude.

[SiuiS]

Ye-eeeesssss, this is literally how the economy works dude.

On the one hand that's ridiculous, on the other I've met some folks who pooled $25,000 between them and just transferred it from account to account depending on whether they needed more or less money when audited.

Need a house? Have a spare two five Kay.
Need low taxes? Give a friend two five Kay.
Want a loan for a car payment? Borrow that two five Kay.

It was a novel idea.

[Madcrafter]

I keep hoping some clever loophole appears that would let me pay off a credit card with another, generating a little feedback loop that spits out air miles.

Though if you can just pass around do something nice like that, no one would ever feel sad again so long as there is one month of rent in the system. This seems like an issue, even if not considered realistic in play.

[Anarion]

Ye-eeeesssss, this is literally how the economy works dude.

Yes, but! But! Usually it's somewhat lossy. Taxes here, surcharges there, bit of interest over there. Game economies sort of make up for that by having currency drain or limiting repeat moves. Otherwise might as well just give everyone +1 forward 100% of the time.

[Thanqol]

I keep hoping some clever loophole appears that would let me pay off a credit card with another, generating a little feedback loop that spits out air miles.

Though if you can just pass around do something nice like that, no one would ever feel sad again so long as there is one month of rent in the system. This seems like an issue, even if not considered realistic in play.


Yes, but! But! Usually it's somewhat lossy. Taxes here, surcharges there, bit of interest over there. Game economies sort of make up for that by having currency drain or limiting repeat moves. Otherwise might as well just give everyone +1 forward 100% of the time.

Well, to do it, do it. The move is called 'do something nice for someone'. When the player says, "I do something nice for Applejack", you say, "Sure, what do you do?"

Then it's like, "uh I guess I throw a party or something" and it's like "so you're spending the evening partying rather than studying? Interesting". Or, "I give her a box full of money", and it's like, "Hey Applejack, how does Twilight just up and giving you a big box of money make you feel? Are you really that close? Do you accept that gift?"

[SiuiS]

Redefined, that is an acceptible drama mill.

[Thanqol]

TICKET MASTER

Responsibility: Harvest apples, Twilight's Helping Her Out while RD is struggling with the crippling lazy Problem.

Background pony tech is much lower at this phase of the show.

Applejack's angry voice became her regular voice as the show went on.

These tickets don't seem to be a responsibility or problem, they just seem to be the players bringing their own drama.

Hoooow coooould yooouuu~!

I really love these early episodes. Everyone's so selfish and manipulative, it's a lovely contrast to how well they all get along by season 4.

Fluttershy seems way cuter in these first few episodes too.

So there's not infrastructure or external problems in this one, but it does raise the question of how PCs come into conflict. That bears some thinking about too.

[TheAmishPirate]

So, after speaking to the smartest and most handsome sempai~ I got some awesome things to think about.

Thought One:: Barter is now replaced with months of rent. The only unit of money is months of rent.

This is a brilliant idea stolen from a Noir detective game. Theoretically any problem can be solved with money - but knowing that getting the killers off your tail will cost you six months rent puts you in a major spot. You can play it safe and cold-hearted and keep your finances healthy, or you can take risks for your moral code and just barely keep your head above water - which leads to a great feedback loop where the desperation of struggling to survive makes you take even more risks.

I really like this, because it addresses the problem of conversion rates very neatly. We don't have to speculate about what sort of things could be bought with 1 Barter, or even the units of currency for it. Everybody understands a month's worth of living expenses, and there are tangible, relatable issues that spring up when said expenses can't be paid.

A random thought; what if, for infrastructure, quality of life improvements, and other such big purchases, players could have the option of selling them/letting them get repossessed in return for months of rent? Not the sort of thing where those improvements go away, just that they cede their control over them. In small town stories, there always seems to be some cantankerous fellow who really wants the Building and Loan/the last free ranch/that darn parking lot, and goes through elaborate measures for the deed or whatever else they need to seize control. I wish I could pluck out an example, but the best one I can think of is Flim and Flam attempting to scam AJ out of the farm. Only, instead of what happens in the episode, they use their cider-making machine to ruin the Apples' cider sales, then offer to buy the farm to give the family some much-needed bits.

[SiuiS]

TICKET MASTER

Responsibility: Harvest apples, Twilight's Helping Her Out while RD is struggling with the crippling lazy Problem.

Background pony tech is much lower at this phase of the show.

Applejack's angry voice became her regular voice as the show went on.

These tickets don't seem to be a responsibility or problem, they just seem to be the players bringing their own drama.

Hoooow coooould yooouuu~!

I really love these early episodes. Everyone's so selfish and manipulative, it's a lovely contrast to how well they all get along by season 4.

Fluttershy seems way cuter in these first few episodes too.

So there's not infrastructure or external problems in this one, but it does raise the question of how PCs come into conflict. That bears some thinking about too.

Twilight spent one month of rent (or was gifted, whatevs) and could extend the bonus to one other pony. They all began bartering for it without asking if that would work.

The cider episode is about the same. Something that's directly related to finances and consumer happiness comes up and the big issue is there isn't enough of that to go around.

[Anarion]

Twilight spent one month of rent (or was gifted, whatevs) and could extend the bonus to one other pony. They all began bartering for it without asking if that would work.

The cider episode is about the same. Something that's directly related to finances and consumer happiness comes up and the big issue is there isn't enough of that to go around.

There's no loss in that one, or even risk of loss. It's strictly a problem of distributing gain. So, the part where you said "whatevs" in parentheses is actually really important. It's like, okay, pulling from that randomness article I linked earlier in this thread with some variation, imagine there are two coin flips. In the first, if you get it you get $10 and if you're wrong you get $5. In the second coinflip, if you get it, you get $20, but if you're wrong you have to pay out $5. Identical expected value, but somebody will get way more nervous about the second coinflip because the spread going into negative means that they could end up worse off than when they started.

That's important because players are going to react differently than ponies, I think. A ticketmaster type situation will engender PVP of some sort as players compete for the benefit, but they'll never take dangerous risks the way they would if they're trying to avoid a major negative like a failed infrastructure collapse or something.

[SiuiS]

There's no loss in that one, or even risk of loss. It's strictly a problem of distributing gain. So, the part where you said "whatevs" in parentheses is actually really important. It's like, okay, pulling from that randomness article I linked earlier in this thread with some variation, imagine there are two coin flips. In the first, if you get it you get $10 and if you're wrong you get $5. In the second coinflip, if you get it, you get $20, but if you're wrong you have to pay out $5. Identical expected value, but somebody will get way more nervous about the second coinflip because the spread going into negative means that they could end up worse off than when they started.

That's important because players are going to react differently than ponies, I think. A ticketmaster type situation will engender PVP of some sort as players compete for the benefit, but they'll never take dangerous risks the way they would if they're trying to avoid a major negative like a failed infrastructure collapse or something.

That's all true, but I didn't propose a mechanic, I proposed an idea that looks like a blind spot in the rules. Hashing out specifics is for after people say "hey, that is indeed a blind spot".

My gut reaction is that this could be handled with the same one-off line format as other tone issues. 'Barf forth apocalyptica' isn't a rule but it does shape the game, and that sort of Game Master's Principle is the application used to solve the infinite +1 forward loop. The GM steps in and tells you how this is complicated by breaking it down at different levels as needed.

[Thanqol]

Currently processing some harcore roleplaying theory. Thinking about how it fits in with this.

Vince Baker talks about "The Conversation". Each *World game is built around one ideal conversation, and everything happens within two standard deviations of that conversation. What do I want my conversation to be?

Thinking. Thinking. Thinking.

[Anarion]

Currently processing some harcore roleplaying theory. Thinking about how it fits in with this.

Vince Baker talks about "The Conversation". Each *World game is built around one ideal conversation, and everything happens within two standard deviations of that conversation. What do I want my conversation to be?

Thinking. Thinking. Thinking.

The most interesting conversation I've had here is the issue of problem juggling. Good god, the town is going to crumble if we don't get the magic stone circle finished! But if Rarity takes a break, she won't finish her dress order. And the mayor is putting in economic sanctions because of the runaway inflation. And we could solve all these things except then I'll go bankrupt, you can't even tell me about whatever your problem is, and honestly, I'd rather solve Rarity's issue than save the town anyway because she gave me a really pretty dress yesterday.

My 2 cents.

[Thanqol]

The most interesting conversation I've had here is the issue of problem juggling. Good god, the town is going to crumble if we don't get the magic stone circle finished! But if Rarity takes a break, she won't finish her dress order. And the mayor is putting in economic sanctions because of the runaway inflation. And we could solve all these things except then I'll go bankrupt, you can't even tell me about whatever your problem is, and honestly, I'd rather solve Rarity's issue than save the town anyway because she gave me a really pretty dress yesterday.

My 2 cents.

Yes. That's super helpful.

The object of the game is to make concrete improvements to your standard of living. But you might not be able to do that because a comfortable town relies on a lot of different moving parts and people are going to ask you to sacrifice your own standard of living in exchange for vague and intangible future benefits.

So this game is about people with conflicting agendas trying to convince other people to make sacrifices. Yes?

[Anarion]

Yes. That's super helpful.

The object of the game is to make concrete improvements to your standard of living. But you might not be able to do that because a comfortable town relies on a lot of different moving parts and people are going to ask you to sacrifice your own standard of living in exchange for vague and intangible future benefits.

So this game is about people with conflicting agendas trying to convince other people to make sacrifices. Yes?

That's a good sum up of my take on it. I'd be curious what others think.

[Thanqol]

With that core object/problem in mind, the following definition suggests itself:

A Problem is, by definition, not something you can deal with on your own. If it were it wouldn't be a Problem, it'd be your day job.

This means that the Loyalty move Help Someone Out becomes very important, and needs a lot of focus and attention, because it might be the primary mechanical vector for resolving a problem.

[SiuiS]

It sounds like if you base it too much in A*W philosophy, you'll never actually get to the happy ending part everyone is working on.

Someone is stressed out and occasionally panicky in every A*W based game I can find on this board. The embedded best principles don't seem to take into account certain aspects of player psychology, especially the one where absent transparency players will invent reasons – which Anarion noticed and spoke to Amish about. I can see that being a huge deal as players who go "by the book" and don't cotton on to how fluid they should be playing. Never achieve anything and everything is always their fault.

Your conversation will have to be less logical and more interpersonal, including the part where you're open about feelings and that the journey is the goal, not the destination, and how sometimes everyone needs a break from the harsh buildup and tension to unwind so they don't just sart saying things to "win" discussion.

E: that's an interesting take. So the issue becomes fine tuning time pressure – there has to be a chance to solve problems faster than they arise, even if not always.

[Madcrafter]

So the issue becomes fine tuning time pressure – there has to be a chance to solve problems faster than they arise, even if not always.I think that is evident. Otherwise the town collapses under its issues and you can start up an AW game.


With that core object/problem in mind, the following definition suggests itself:

A Problem is, by definition, not something you can deal with on your own. If it were it wouldn't be a Problem, it'd be your day job.

This means that the Loyalty move Help Someone Out becomes very important, and needs a lot of focus and attention, because it might be the primary mechanical vector for resolving a problem.It gives a more collective bent, and does make something like a discorded loyalty stat very weighty. Not only can you no longer help anyone else, but you become an active problem generator, potentially a very prolific one (at least in the current incarnation).

It also ups the ante a bit on cooperation. A group of characters involved in vicious infighting are going to be drowned in their problems much faster, while a harmonious collective will solve things with a minimum of fuss. I guess it would then be up to the MC to fine tune the pace of the game.


Random thought: problem chaining? AJ can't finish bucking the apples because she was tired from staying up helping PP with party prep, which needed to be done overnight because Rarity was late making decorations etc. etc.

[Thanqol]

It sounds like if you base it too much in A*W philosophy, you'll never actually get to the happy ending part everyone is working on.

Someone is stressed out and occasionally panicky in every A*W based game I can find on this board. The embedded best principles don't seem to take into account certain aspects of player psychology, especially the one where absent transparency players will invent reasons – which Anarion noticed and spoke to Amish about. I can see that being a huge deal as players who go "by the book" and don't cotton on to how fluid they should be playing. Never achieve anything and everything is always their fault.

Your conversation will have to be less logical and more interpersonal, including the part where you're open about feelings and that the journey is the goal, not the destination, and how sometimes everyone needs a break from the harsh buildup and tension to unwind so they don't just sart saying things to "win" discussion.


This is a weird question. Take a look at Vince Baker's blog (http://lumpley.com/index.php/anyway/toc/categories) under "Roleplaying Theory, Harcore" for discussions as to how things like this work/social dynamics/implied moves etc.


I think that is evident. Otherwise the town collapses under its issues and you can start up an AW game.

It gives a more collective bent, and does make something like a discorded loyalty stat very weighty. Not only can you no longer help anyone else, but you become an active problem generator, potentially a very prolific one (at least in the current incarnation).

I think Discorded stats are a fantastic idea to take problem generation out of the MC's hands and create player conflicts. I think that makes my execution of them super important and I need to think about them really carefully.


It also ups the ante a bit on cooperation. A group of characters involved in vicious infighting are going to be drowned in their problems much faster, while a harmonious collective will solve things with a minimum of fuss. I guess it would then be up to the MC to fine tune the pace of the game.

I think this is why Tell Your Friends, or some equivalent, is such an important move because it stops everyone from just forming up into a perfect, harmonious collective instantly.


Random thought: problem chaining? AJ can't finish bucking the apples because she was tired from staying up helping PP with party prep, which needed to be done overnight because Rarity was late making decorations etc. etc.

I think I want to re-do Act Under Pressure to do something like this. Make it like Great Works or Act Under Fire where a total success is you just avoid bad consequences.

[Thanqol]

Putting a link to this (http://lumpley.com/index.php/anyway/thread/554)here because it's super important.

[SiuiS]

This is a weird question. Take a look at Vince Baker's blog (http://lumpley.com/index.php/anyway/toc/categories) under "Roleplaying Theory, Harcore" for discussions as to how things like this work/social dynamics/implied moves etc.


It's the same question that's gone unanswered since A*W first popped up as a thing the group would try. The problem is fundamentally that if you, a unique individual running a game, understand something the rules don't say, then someone will F*ck it up. If you as a game designer have a clear idea but put down the surface patterns you get incomplete rules because of your blind spots.

Look at all this RAW crap for point one and the issues with game designers making half-rules that are unclear for two. Thanqol reads a cool blog does not mean Starry's friend will be able to run the game perfectly if they pick it up from Starry cold.


It's not a problem that is happening right now. I'm bringing it up because it's a problem that will only happen if you don't think it can.

E: that is a nice blog though. It's like seeing someone recorded all the rants I threw at my players who fumbled with GM hats in the last five years.

[Anarion]

My one complaint with some of the blog posts is that it treats social groups as rational actors subject to logical (if not entirely sensible) rules that can somehow be enumerated. This problem, more or less. (http://xkcd.com/592/)

[TheAmishPirate]

It's the same question that's gone unanswered since A*W first popped up as a thing the group would try. The problem is fundamentally that if you, a unique individual running a game, understand something the rules don't say, then someone will F*ck it up. If you as a game designer have a clear idea but put down the surface patterns you get incomplete rules because of your blind spots.

Look at all this RAW crap for point one and the issues with game designers making half-rules that are unclear for two. Thanqol reads a cool blog does not mean Starry's friend will be able to run the game perfectly if they pick it up from Starry cold.


It's not a problem that is happening right now. I'm bringing it up because it's a problem that will only happen if you don't think it can.


My one complaint with some of the blog posts is that it treats social groups as rational actors subject to logical (if not entirely sensible) rules that can somehow be enumerated. This problem, more or less. (http://xkcd.com/592/)

On top of both of these points, A*W says the player is the one who is ultimately responsible for making things work, while the MC has little to no accountability. If a player misunderstands a written rule? The player has to run with it. If the MC misunderstands what a player's doing? The player has to run with it. If the player didn't realize something the MC had assumed? They have to run with it. If the MC decides they're bored of an NPC, and the player still finds them interesting? The player has to run with it. Or without it, rather. And in a game where the players have to fight tooth and nail for every quality-of-life improvement, the phrase "there are no mistakes in A*W" rings a bit hollow when a misunderstanding earns you a season's worth of poverty.

Or to put it more simply, an interesting story is one thing, it's quite another to enjoy writing it. So it's best not to leave anything unclear.

[Anarion]

I had a thought prompted by Deadly bringing up the growing up moves in the other thread. This game doesn't have growing up or special new PC moves, but it does have between season moves that can give each character a unique way to build up power and be more prepared for the next season. And it has advances that make the characters progressively stronger and more likely to succeed on any given check. That made me think about a dynamic that I would enjoy.

So, I think most of us have played XCOM (the modern one), right? If not, there are plenty of Let's Plays, stop reading and go watch Beaglerush blow up some aliens. I'll wait.

Okay, so, a major dynamic in XCOM is how at the beginning, everything seems to be falling apart around you. Panic constantly goes up, the enemies outnumber and outgun you, and if you don't make all correct decisions and succeed on every mission early, you can lose a bunch of countries. On the hardest difficulty, you are virtually guaranteed to lose several countries no matter what you do. But, as the game progresses, you get better tech. Your soldiers get stronger. The aliens upgrade, but they can't keep up and it's possible to stabilize to the point that you can take your sweet time building up and bring the fight to the aliens.

I think that would make a great dynamic here. Unless a group rolls perfectly in their first season, they should not be able to solve all their problems. Some bad things should happen, some catastrophes of one sort or another should afflict PCs, the town, or the kingdom. Problem generation should be balanced around that. The first set of end of season moves should be the chance for the PCs to get themselves back on their feet, and get just a little better next season, just barely holding things off. And by the third of fourth season, the characters should be in a position where, barring a terrible string of luck, they can start getting on top of their problems if they want to and get toward the happy ending that I think most of us ultimately want for a pony-themed game.

[Thanqol]

My one complaint with some of the blog posts is that it treats social groups as rational actors subject to logical (if not entirely sensible) rules that can somehow be enumerated. This problem, more or less. (http://xkcd.com/592/)

This is an absurd argument no deeper than "There is no way we can know anything for sure, man!"

I far prefer a serious attempt to understand the nature of a RPG and what it asks/demands/implies than just a vague hand-wavy gut-feel approach that assumes that the stuff that Gary Gygax came up with fifty years ago was somehow the most pure manifestation of the potential concept. That's absurd.

Have a fruit based essay (http://www.indie-rpgs.com/archive/index.php?topic=20791.msg216100#msg216100)


On top of both of these points, A*W says the player is the one who is ultimately responsible for making things work, while the MC has little to no accountability. If a player misunderstands a written rule? The player has to run with it. If the MC misunderstands what a player's doing? The player has to run with it. If the player didn't realize something the MC had assumed? They have to run with it. If the MC decides they're bored of an NPC, and the player still finds them interesting? The player has to run with it. Or without it, rather. And in a game where the players have to fight tooth and nail for every quality-of-life improvement, the phrase "there are no mistakes in A*W" rings a bit hollow when a misunderstanding earns you a season's worth of poverty.

Or to put it more simply, an interesting story is one thing, it's quite another to enjoy writing it. So it's best not to leave anything unclear.

I think your idea of AW is not the same as what AW actually is. I would very much like to see page numbers and quoted paragraphs from the AW book that support what you're saying. I think that the book says the opposite to a lot of those.

Your idea is derived from how specific people have run AW rather than what AW says, and given how different AW is as a system compared to what we're used to, teething problems are to be expected. My suspicion is that these are personelle issues rather than system issues.

[SiuiS]

It is not my job to correct you, but inform you. You are building something and our job is to collectively stand around your stone circle and tell you when something is off-kilter. All we have to go on is what you've explained of your floor plan, and out memories and knowledge of your building blocks. We are not perfect minds. Perspective is our only role here.

When one of us says "this rock looks out of place, it's casting it's shadow wrong", maybe it is. But maybe not. That's your call; we just draw your attention to it. You could agree or disagree or say that's going to be moved around later, don't worry yet. What looks like a problem could be an opening for something you haven't done yet, or maybe you're just not calibrating this part yet. It is only troubling when your response is that you don't understand why I say the shadow is off so there must not be a problem.


I suppose I misunderstood my part in this process. More power to you.

[TheAmishPirate]

I think your idea of AW is not the same as what AW actually is. I would very much like to see page numbers and quoted paragraphs from the AW book that support what you're saying. I think that the book says the opposite to a lot of those.

Your idea is derived from how specific people have run AW rather than what AW says, and given how different AW is as a system compared to what we're used to, teething problems are to be expected. My suspicion is that these are personelle issues rather than system issues.

Yeah, I haven't bought the core book, and this is derived wholly from what you and others have told me regarding the system. I admit I'm having trouble seeing how AW can be the opposite of that when I've been flat-out told some of those things, but that's a discussion for another time, and mostly just means that there's little I can contribute to this part of the discussion.

I guess take this as a reminder to write out all your assumptions and whatnot? That's the most useful thing I can derive from this right now.

[Anarion]

This is an absurd argument no deeper than "There is no way we can know anything for sure, man!"


There are more options than "this is the best thing ever" or "I dismiss everything you're saying." I think he makes a lot of good points. I also think reading his stuff sometimes makes it sound like social rules are more absolute than they really are. Don't turn off your brain just because you're following one more of thinking, is all I'm saying.



I think your idea of AW is not the same as what AW actually is. I would very much like to see page numbers and quoted paragraphs from the AW book that support what you're saying. I think that the book says the opposite to a lot of those.

Your idea is derived from how specific people have run AW rather than what AW says, and given how different AW is as a system compared to what we're used to, teething problems are to be expected. My suspicion is that these are personelle issues rather than system issues.


Yeah, I haven't bought the core book, and this is derived wholly from what you and others have told me regarding the system. I admit I'm having trouble seeing how AW can be the opposite of that when I've been flat-out told some of those things, but that's a discussion for another time, and mostly just means that there's little I can contribute to this part of the discussion.

I guess take this as a reminder to write out all your assumptions and whatnot? That's the most useful thing I can derive from this right now.

Case in point. I agree with Thanqol that personnel has been an issue. I didn't run it perfectly, he may not have either. We're both doing the best we can and hopefully it's getting better. At the same time, we've had two different attempts at doing this thing and Amish has run into issues in both games. That at least suggests to me that there's some kind of mismatch between what's written down about how to do this thing and the ability of MC and players to jump into it and have fun.

[Thanqol]

Yeah, I haven't bought the core book, and this is derived wholly from what you and others have told me regarding the system. I admit I'm having trouble seeing how AW can be the opposite of that when I've been flat-out told some of those things, but that's a discussion for another time, and mostly just means that there's little I can contribute to this part of the discussion.

I guess take this as a reminder to write out all your assumptions and whatnot? That's the most useful thing I can derive from this right now.

Note that I don't agree with a bunch of decisions Anarion's been making with regards to the principles and agenda. I'm not gonna backseat GM or anything though.

Best recommend is to buy the gosh darn book but in lieu of that I'll provide counter-cites.


On top of both of these points, A*W says the player is the one who is ultimately responsible for making things work, while the MC has little to no accountability.

Make things work? What things work? Make the game work? Why does the MC have no accountability for making the game work? Define 'accountability'?

The MC has three jobs. Make Apocalypse World Seem Real, Make The Players Lives Not Boring, Play To Find Out. Those are his responsibility. It's a very clear responsibility with a lot of words relating to how to do that. The players also have a responsibility. It's to play their characters as if they were real people.


If a player misunderstands a written rule? The player has to run with it.

This isn't a rule. Why would that be a rule? That play can continue when someone misunderstands a rule is a facet of concentric game design (http://lumpley.com/index.php/anyway/thread/594).

Part of 'Play to Find Out', though, which is a core principle is that people shouldn't make decisions about stuff before they show up. That's against the Principles. It is interesting when you Find Out something about your character you didn't expect. When Mister Big murders that guy for crossing him I just found out that Mister Big has crazy anger management issues. That's super interesting! I'm learning about my own character! The story just came alive in my hands; I no longer have control over it, it's a living, vivid thing that goes somewhere that I didn't expect!

It's not a rule. It's a principle. It's the principle that you're here to find out what happens here, now. It's the principle that lives should be not boring. And in the situation where all of those things line up and it's WAY more interesting that Mister Big kills that guy than the reality where Mister Big just kind of blinks and backs down like a coward then you go with the interesting one even if it takes you out of your comfort zone.


If the MC misunderstands what a player's doing? The player has to run with it.

You've repeated the same thing a bunch of times, so I'll come up with some counter examples.

D&D. The GM misunderstands what the player is doing? The player has to run with it. Define how this is an AW thing.


If the player didn't realize something the MC had assumed? They have to run with it.

If what the player is proposing is more interesting than what the MC had assumed then the MC runs with that instead (Principle: "Sometimes declaim decision making", "Ask Questions Like Crazy"). This happened a bunch of times in Monster Hearts, the NPCs are nothing like I originally envisioned them because the players are deciding like 60% of their personalities.


If the MC decides they're bored of an NPC, and the player still finds them interesting? The player has to run with it. Or without it, rather.

One Principle is "Look at everyone through the crosshairs". That is very direct, deliberate and specific. The MC should always be wondering if they should kill their NPCs off. This prevents the MC from getting attached or overshadowing the PCs agency.

Another Principle, equal in weight, is "Be a fan of the player characters". Killing off an interesting NPC out of "boredom" does not serve this Principle, so therefore it is Not Legit. Also, the MC's job is to Make Apocalypse World Seem Real. Does it fit with that? There's also the very specific Fronts/countdowns system that talks clearly and loudly about how/when to do this.

Also, any other system. The GM decides that they're bored of a NPC and the player still finds them interesting? Oh wait, paragraph 3, section 4 of the D&D players handbook says that the GM can't kill off NPCs the players care about. What?


And in a game where the players have to fight tooth and nail for every quality-of-life improvement, the phrase "there are no mistakes in A*W" rings a bit hollow when a misunderstanding earns you a season's worth of poverty.

Who the hell said "There are no mistakes in AW?" That might have been something you've pulled out of arguments with Anarion but that's not in the principles anywhere.

So, to bring us back a bit, what is the objective of Apocalypse World? In Chess it's to capture the enemy King. In Night's Black Agents it's to dismantle the Vampire conspiracy. In Apocalypse World it's to find out what the player characters make of their world.

Now, what happens if I straight up ask you what your character makes of his world? Asked before my game, I'd say "Mister Big would run a slightly brutal but effective and orderly democracy. He'd conserve fuel, form his holding into a centre of trade, conquer the local gangs, and balance necessary violence with a commitment to the ideals he espouses. Eventually he'd take back the surface and get civilisation back on course. Easy!"

But, instead, through his interaction with the mechanics - that espouse the primacy of violence, an unpredictable and threatening world, and a focus on spending/controlling stuff Mister Big turned out differently. He turned out to be a petty, brutal tyrant who could only keep his hold on power through ever escalating threats and examples. Everyone else was afraid of Mister Big, and this changed who Mister Big was in my head. I wasn't playing to tell the story I'd already decided on, I was playing to find out what Mister Big did next. I was also playing Mister Big as though he was a real person, and I was really interested in that real person. Mister Big was not an avatar of my own play, he's not a vessel through which I could 'win' the game, because the object of the game and the principle by which I accomplish it is to play Mister Big as though he was a real person and find out what he does.


Compare and contrast to Fallout Equestria, and Tea Party for the Post Apocalypse. The object of the game's mechanics is to win increasingly large and serious fights and encounters. The principle is to do this by playing an effective, co-operative team who stand strong against all the world's evil. If the team breaks apart the game instantly ends. That game went through serious convulsions when Tiki Snakes followed the A*W Principles of playing to see what happens/playing his character like a real person when what that game demanded was co-operation and teamwork as a necessary precursor for survival. He was after Story Now, the game was Step On Up, and it wound up with him having to leave the game. And the same principle applies in reverse - if you play an A*W game with your character as an avatar of you, with the intention to win encounters, and with a willingness to put aside your own agenda for the sake of party unity or your own pre-packaged character concept then you're not engaging with the principles.

So if I went with Anarion's idea of escalating XCOM style gameplay, which is a terrible notion for this game, it'd be a failure. Because it'd propose an objective (everyone works together harmoniously to overcome external threat) which clashes with the game's agenda. By making the objective more individual (The object of the game is to make concrete improvements to your standard of living) instead the appropriate clashes emerge - petty arguments over small scale resource distribution in a rural town.


Or to put it more simply, an interesting story is one thing, it's quite another to enjoy writing it. So it's best not to leave anything unclear.

Actually read the A*W book and indicate what is unclear rather than playing chinese whispers with the A*W book filtered through first-time A*W GMs. It's a cheap book, it's like $10 for the PDF, you've got no excuse. This entire argument line is like hearing someone slag on MLP by what they've seen of bronies and screencaps. That's not the source material you're criticising here!

[Thanqol]

There are more options than "this is the best thing ever" or "I dismiss everything you're saying." I think he makes a lot of good points. I also think reading his stuff sometimes makes it sound like social rules are more absolute than they really are. Don't turn off your brain just because you're following one more of thinking, is all I'm saying.

Did you have some specific concerns, counter-arguments or problems with any particular entry? I'm curious if you did, that'd be interesting. A lot of the really interesting stuff happens in the comments of those articles, after all.

If it's just an appeal to not become a zealot, uh, thanks.

EDIT: Topical. (http://lumpley.com/index.php/anyway/thread/389) And more topical. (http://lumpley.com/index.php/anyway/thread/390)

[TheAmishPirate]

Actually read the A*W book and indicate what is unclear rather than playing chinese whispers with the A*W book filtered through first-time A*W GMs. It's a cheap book, it's like $10 for the PDF, you've got no excuse. This entire argument line is like hearing someone slag on MLP by what they've seen of bronies and screencaps. That's not the source material you're criticising here!

I can't and won't respond to a lot of the above for this reason, and I apologize to that wall of text for it. Giving an unfair and incomplete judgement of something you're passionate about is a move for jerks. I'll read through the core book when I can.


Part of 'Play to Find Out', though, which is a core principle is that people shouldn't make decisions about stuff before they show up. That's against the Principles. It is interesting when you Find Out something about your character you didn't expect. When Mister Big murders that guy for crossing him I just found out that Mister Big has crazy anger management issues. That's super interesting! I'm learning about my own character! The story just came alive in my hands; I no longer have control over it, it's a living, vivid thing that goes somewhere that I didn't expect!

It's not a rule. It's a principle. It's the principle that you're here to find out what happens here, now. It's the principle that lives should be not boring. And in the situation where all of those things line up and it's WAY more interesting that Mister Big kills that guy than the reality where Mister Big just kind of blinks and backs down like a coward then you go with the interesting one even if it takes you out of your comfort zone.

That said, this paragraph right here is where I think some of my current in-practice woes are coming from. Namely:


It is interesting when you Find Out something about your character you didn't expect.

What if I already learned something about them, intended to make them act in a way that highlights it, mess it up somehow, and the MC declares it a more interesting choice? I didn't learn something about the character, I was forced into a decision that they were never supposed to make. And what if I personally don't find that new decision more interesting? What if I don't enjoy it? What if this forces me to drastically change the character into something I'm less interested in playing, all because of the mechanical equivalent of poor grammar? Mind, there's degrees bordering from "ugh, that's annoying" to "ugh, I no longer want to play this character", but the question still stands. In my current understanding of the system, my only recourse would be to plead my case to the MC, and hope that they see things my way. But what do you say?

EDIT: Aaaaand I should've read the comments on those posts more in-depth. Give me a sec, maybe I'll find something satisfactory there.

EDIT2: Found a lot of neat stuff in there. Still interested in hearing your opinion on the matter.

[Thanqol]

I can't and won't respond to a lot of the above for this reason, and I apologize to that wall of text for it. Giving an unfair and incomplete judgement of something you're passionate about is a move for jerks. I'll read through the core book when I can.

Radical.


That said, this paragraph right here is where I think some of my current in-practice woes are coming from. Namely:

What if I already learned something about them, intended to make them act in a way that highlights it, mess it up somehow, and the MC declares it a more interesting choice? I didn't learn something about the character, I was forced into a decision that they were never supposed to make. And what if I personally don't find that new decision more interesting? What if I don't enjoy it? What if this forces me to drastically change the character into something I'm less interested in playing, all because of the mechanical equivalent of poor grammar? Mind, there's degrees bordering from "ugh, that's annoying" to "ugh, I no longer want to play this character", but the question still stands. In my current understanding of the system, my only recourse would be to plead my case to the MC, and hope that they see things my way. But what do you say?

EDIT: Aaaaand I should've read the comments on those posts more in-depth. Give me a sec, maybe I'll find something satisfactory there.

EDIT2: Found a lot of neat stuff in there. Still interested in hearing your opinion on the matter.

Depends on the game and the pre-assumptions set up in the game.

Sole ownership of your character is a fiction. Characters are all about the context. There was a really interesting argument about this right when Vincent was coming up with the concept of Right To Dream.

Okay, so. Imagine you're playing a superheroes game and you're a four-colour, all American golden age hero. You beat up bad guys and lock them in easily escapable prisons because that's what you do, right? But then the MC keeps putting you in dark, edgy situations appropriate for a modern hero, asking questions like 'is non violence okay?' or 'Should superheroes be registered with the government?'. And you're like "No! I don't want to answer those questions! I want to play a four colour golden age hero!" What's going on there? Is this legit?